At the end of May, the third bloodiest month of his 50-month Iraq War, President George W. Bush, red-white-and-blue wreath in hand, staged a Memorial Day photo op at Arlington National Cemetery with its freshly dug graves. “Now this hallowed ground receives a new generation of heroes,” intoned Bush. “Our enemies long for our retreat. They question our moral purpose. …… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (9)Page 1 of 1 pagesI seriously doubt al Qaeda or Iraqi insurgents spend a lot of time “questioning our moral purpose.” Another reminder who the Republicans consider their “enemies.”
Posted by monkyhead on Jun 12, 2007 at 12:37 PM With support for his arguments like Michael Moore’s “Fahrenheit 911” it’s not likely anything I have to say will change the author’s mind.
I don’t know where the AWOLs, desertions and under filled quotas data comes from (he seldom lists his sources as long as it supports his view), but the latest data on MSM (a source of equal quality to Moore) refutes at least the enlistments YTD and except for the Army others this week were reported to be up.
To save time I will simply insert my comments from the “These Guns for Hire” thread…
No two wars are ever going to be exactly the same. All are largely unpredictable. Certainly there are similarities between Iraq and Viet Nam. If I were to pick a comparison, I would say our current situation is closest to the Indian Wars of 1870 -1880 in the US western states.
The civilians were under attack by a diverse group of tribes who had a history of fighting each other. They had many legitimate grievances against the US as a nation, but those citizens under attack had little to do with the treatment of the tribes over a period of a century and a half — the same is true now. In tribal thinking — any individual on the “enemy” side is fair game.
The Indians had strong religious backing, belief in a warrior’s reward for death in their cause, and often resorted to outrageous torture and mutilation.
Both are primarily guerrilla wars with the enemy hard to positively identify.
Had the US pulled its army back beyond the Mississippi the conflict would not have ended. The Indians would have perceived it as a sign of weakness on our part, vindication of their cause and been encouraged to pursue and increase the same methods.Eventually, to hold the tribes beyond the Mississippi, our military would have been sent back to start from an even less advantageous position.
Note that the Indian Wars lasted a decade and there is still controversy over the morality.
Posted by whattheheck on Jun 12, 2007 at 3:10 PM “For the Kamunens, blood is thicker than oil.”
Or love of sleeping late and finding/banging a gf is more important that work of any sort. Lousy poster boys for the antiwar movement and sad excuses for proud Finns.
Posted by wolf on Jun 12, 2007 at 3:30 PM Wolf,
Ja fur sure!
Half way through basic training don’t hardly nobody want to be der no more, Leo.
The Finns put up a hell of a fight against the invading Soviets about 1938 or ‘39. My wife’s uncle went over from Sweden and joined them.
When the international news media reported that the Ruskies were bombing Finland, Stalin’s Foreign Minister, Molotov claimed they were only “dropping bread to feed the hungry.”
In return the Finns dug covered foxholes and as Soviet tanks went by they popped out and threw bottles of flamming gasoline down the hatches. They said they gave us “bread” so we gave them back “Molotov Cocktails. (How it got its name.)
Posted by whattheheck on Jun 12, 2007 at 7:10 PM wth - Finland is also the only country that repaid its WWII debt fully. A proud and wonderful people and land (ok, i am biased, but proudly).
Posted by wolf on Jun 12, 2007 at 7:53 PM Wolf,
As a Swede (Well, half) and fellow Viking — I have adopted a slogan for my family quest (if I ever design one)...
Grym när inflamarad
Vicious when riled :-)
Posted by whattheheck on Jun 12, 2007 at 10:33 PM While I am against the Iraq ‘war’, I have to agree that the Finn’s cited gave poor reason’s for not wanting to go back.
I’d imagine that in War II, there were some GI’s complaining that they were being used and not real happy to be wherever they were.
Granted, the troop’s in Iraq are being used in a way that War II troop’s were not, the fact that so many go and do their duty speaks volume’s about the American sprit.
Now, if those troop’s had leadership that was worthy of their sacrifice’s, that would be a different story.
As has been mentioned before in other post’s, the war in Iraq should be about fighting Islamic terrorist’s who wish to harm America.But the terrorist’s came to Iraq after Saddam fell.
The presence of out troop’s in Iraq just gives their radical viewpoint a greater reality among the uneducated masses of Muslim’s. The Shrubs’ daddy, while not the greatest President, was way ahead of the son in understanding reality.
Shrub allowed Rummy to re-invent the military, ignoring military leader’s who tried to tell him that his plan would invite problem’s later on. A fact cited by Bush Sr in stopping Gulf 1 when he did. And a fact that has proven true, despite White House spin to the contrary.
Posted by farmer on Jun 19, 2007 at 10:12 AM Farmer says “the troops in IRak are being used”, “the fact that so many go and do their duty speaks volumes about the American spirit”, and then he mentions “the uneducated masses of Muslims”:
I fully agree with you about the troops being used, though I cannot comprehend what you understand by “duty “when you are talking about people who were sent to a war based on liesm for the only purpose of making sure you will continue to exploit oil in a land which doesn’t belong to you. If their duty is to follow orders no matter how cruel and uncalled for they are, I wonder who the really “uneducated masses” are from. Education is not going to school, it’s something much deeper and doesn’t include the acceptance of war as if it were a simple game. War kills, destroys, opens wounds and is a barbarian activity.
Posted by Maria on Jun 22, 2007 at 3:31 AM Maria, by duty, I mean that we need a military that will follow orders, rather than debate which ones are correct.
It is true that with this administration, they should be debating which orders to follow. But I am very hopeful that this administration is one that never will be repeated.
Never before have the American people been saddled with a President that never had a clue as to what reality is all about.
This whole administration should be facing charges for all its illegal, unethical and egotistical actions.
That is not wholly the fault of the military, although Tommy Franks should have remembered that his duty extended to his troops as well as to the politicans, and refused to let Rummy brow neat him into accepting a plan that was all but doomed from the start.
We are going to need a strong military as long as other countries and peoples take actions against us. That military deserves a better Commander in Chief than they have had and it is up to us, the voter’s, to assure that they get that leadership.
“It is good that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it” was said by a General long ago. It would be nice if we lived in a world where wars didn’t exist. But we don’t.
As soon as the rest of the world can be convinced of your feelings about war not being acceptable, we can do away with a military. Until then, I am very glad that we have one. I just wish we had a political leadership that is worthy of such a military force as we have.
Posted by farmer on Jun 22, 2007 at 1:07 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Joel Bleifuss
- Obama’s ‘Ben Tre Logic
- Block ’Em, Sock ’Em
- Buy Back Our Government
- A Specter is Haunting Dems
- Bailout Bandits
- Building Utopia
A new documentary profiles the rise and fall of a Depression-era utopian experiment in the Bronx.
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1979 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
427 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2007 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
