TELLING LIKE IT IS

Recently, a story crossed my path of a couple of Chaplains being asked by the media if their troops were having any problems. It is obvious to me that the chaplains are trying to be honest: many (soldiers) feel they are risking their lives. Their soldier buddies have died. And for what? A futile mission with an Afghan population mired in the Middle Ages. The chaplains said that the many soldiers who come to them have a sense of futility and anger about what they are being asked to do. They feel they are risking their lives for progress that's hard to figure. They are tired, strained, confused and just want to get through it. The Chaplains said they were speaking out because the men could not. Here's what amazes me: you have soldiers saying how they feel, the chaplains trying to be honest and then a commander coming in and discounting all they say.

The Battalion commander says his men aren't demoralized and his spin is that they have accomplished lots thus far. The good Colonel argues that counter-insurgency will win over in the long haul, maybe 10-12 years (my numbers but I'm sure it is what he meant as we know what a counter insurgency operation entails).

In a media driven war, no one is more suspicious than me: reporters in a war situation are out for a story and not necessarily the truth but this is simply fact, verified by any source except Fox News, of course. What idiot could not say that Afghanistan is a place with no ending, no clear mission: now a stupid strategy of protecting the people, don't kill the enemy even if some of the people are the enemy. You have got to be kidding me! Young Marines who have been taught to kill the enemy and to grieve for their fallen comrades are now told, "let the perpetrators who plant the rosdside bombs escape if there is any chance civilians might get hurt." Now, this is the way to fight a war!

At the hightest levels, the word is, this war is winnable, more troops, etc. On Sixty Minutes, some general answers as though he is a robot: "can do," troops understand why they are in Afghanistan, etc. They love it. Troops understand it? Bullshit. I don't understand it. McChrystal is on TV more than some pop icon. I would fire his ass in a minute if I were the commander-in-chief. His job is soldiering, not trying to convince Americans of "more troops." Generals always want more troops. The counter insurgency strategy might work but it will take ten or fifteen more years to work and anybody who believes Americans will put up with that raise your hand. McChrystal says anybody who doesn't go along is shortsighted. Tell that to families whose loved ones are going to die for that strategy.

Afghanistan is an overlay on Vietnam. How many of us heard troops say in Vietnam, "What are we doing here?" Most of us realized after we had been in Nam a few months, this is crazy and for what. Afghanistan is ten times worse. There is no solution. Politics of the country and even the history aside; more troops is not the answer. VP Biden's plan is better; keep older Special Forces troops around {what many Americans don't realize since so few have served in the military, we have an an extremely well trained segment of our military that loves war, fighting, and will keep at it. The Green Berets or snake eaters as they are often called are somewhat crazy and just the type of soldiers we need in Afghanistan. We need to them in sufficient numbers, to rotate in and out, simply let them stay and work the counter insurgency strategy. With them, ten years might be OK}, They will get out of the Star Wars uniforms and simply fight the Taliban to a standoff. The third course is maybe just a gradual withdrawal. Create a very liberal immigration policy for women. But, I hope and pray that as a supporter, bigtime, Mr. President, you will not let Afghanistan become your Vietnam. God bless you.

Letter to the President

I am a strong supporter of the President and fear that Afghanistan is a quagmire that will drag him/us down. I am a retired military chaplain (COL). I have worked for several generals personally, have been in hundreds of staff meetings and I can tell the President one thing beyond a shadow of any doubt: generals always want more troops. I have enormous respect for General Petraeus and fighting a counter insurgency is a good strategy. However, we are talking years for it to work.

I am not going to get into those areas about Afghanistan that you know far better than me. But, it is a "tar baby" that cannot be won. More troops only means more American lives lost. Mr. President, I think your "out" is NATO. It is a NATO mission. Already we have the most troops in there and Nato needs to "pony" up. They're not going to do it. Next case. But, no more troops. My idea: Give it to the Taliban, establish a very liberal immigration policy, especially for women. And, then we can become the "insurgency." But, please Mr. President, no more troops. God bless you.

CHAPLAINS WEIGH IN ON AFGHANISTAN

Have you guys been reading the Doonesbury comic strip each day? The writer is drawing some pretty tight comparisons between Afghanistan and our sojourn in Vietnam. (getting involved in a civil war, propping up a questionable government, no desire among the populous for us to be there, lack of support from surrounding nations, etc.) What think ye? Don

I would not give us the chance of a snowball in hell in Afghanistan. When we have 50% of our force there being contractors, When we must oppose the nation’s only real cash crop. When we don’t have the guts as a nation and administration and media to fight a war, Even if our military had the highest morale, how do we win without a win mentality? What do we win? If we won it what would we do with it? Clyde

Wish I could see a better solution. I don’t have a family member or friend to donate to this venture, and anyway, I think we probably have already done all that we can reasonably do. We won. Let’s go home. Lamar

Good reasoning, Claude. Here is the contradiction I see for the US in Afghanistan: only a very aggressive (read bloody, with heavy civilian casualties) military effort would bring anything approaching a “win;” this administration, with increasing pressure from the political left, will find such efforts increasingly untenable. This is to not even mention growing American casualties, and our “allies” bailing out as the casualties mount. Lamar

I, too, am very concerned, but my conclusions are mixed. On the one hand, I'm convinced we should not fight except to win, though winning in Afghanistan might require killing most of the occupants of that land and surrounding countries; which we can't and should not do, not as Americans nor as NATO forces. Probably we should not fight to impose representative democracy on a people that don't have the basic values necessary for it to take root and grow, especially when we seem to be rapidly losing those essential values, ourselves.Perhaps, we should provide a buffer, is such is possible, for a specified period of time to allow the Afghans to take responsibility for their own, with the clear understanding that the will be on their own. But what do I know?

Clyde,I'm weary too, and some days I'm attempted to quit, to turn it off, so I can focus on things I feel I have some control over.But thenI think I'd be playing into the hands of some elements that intend to win by attrition as we opt out until they have full sway in all government branches and can more their designs forward to quickly and far that they can't be reversed short of heavy domestic bloodshed--and perhaps not even then, which they are sure we'd have no stomach for--and perhaps not even then. So I'm going to keep trying, like those young men/grunts did so long ago when their service for their country was repaid with demeaning comments and actions. I never could really understand at the feeling level what kept the grunts going in the face of imminent death there and in light of certain disrespect back home.
Lamar, I am with you. I would add one caveat: create an extremely liberal immigration policy for Afghan women. Let's at least give them a chance. I keep hearing that Pakistan is key. Agree but they need to figure that out. Claude

Claude, good comments but any way you cut it, it is muddled and symbolically, Vietnam, revisited, mainly in terms of how long we would need to be there. What we seem to intentionally ignore is the fact that we are dealing with a tribal people, mostly Muslim, mired in the Middle Ages. Why is this so hard for us to grasp? What I think is happening is the same thing as Vietnam: the generals leading the president down the primrose path of more troops, a military victory. It can't happen.
Jerry

WOLFMAN IS ON THE MOVE

wolfman is moving at a steady clip, today is his first night outside of yosemite park. it took him 7 days of steady hiking, what a dude.
later,
immo

SITREP ON TRIP TO NORTH CAROLINA

I know this is not required but in order to avoid an article 32 investigation, I am doing a prelim report. The peaches are picked, Frances Leigh, the Granddaughter and I made our way to SC. I heard a couple of great jokes about the Guv who would not resign but I can't remember them. A couple of family things and now I am standing in the door waiting for the greenlight and on the way back to CA. I get back late Thursday night and may see you guys at Whole Foods on Friday. I truest that you have held it together since I have been out of the AO. Larry, have a great trip, we'll be following your progress and you can count on me keeping it on the front burner, along with the absence of trashing of the guru.

When I come to the South, Rachael, my youngest daughter says, "Dad, your IQ drops and your vocie slows down." OK! I do have some observations, however. First of all, I have always thought that the South would come to a point where integration would have been a transitioning point. Meaning that not only were blacks in the market place but integrating into all aspects of society. It ain't going to happen in the South, especially the deep South. There is lots of integration in the workplace. You can go into any bank or store and African Americans are fully integrated into the work force but there is absolutely no social intergration: churches are segregated, etc. And, I use to think it was going to change but not so.

I would say that I talked to hundreds about politics, etc., I was the only Democrat, other than my brother in the entire state. I think that the Prez must have stuffed the ballot boxes. It was amazing. And, the vast majority of the views, at least those I talked to, are the "Fox" news types, same old right wing stuff that we hear in CA. In fact, if it was health care, whatever the same type of arguments. Keep in mind now, we are talking this is truly rural NC. If I could and will from my iPhone send you a tobacco plant. In fact, I just finished reading what is his name, oh, Howard Dean's book on Health Care Reform. It is right on. These people don't read any of this stuff; of course, then again, in CA, the right wing doesn't read them either. In fact, this was an interesting story: some congressman had scheduled a town hall meeting to answer questions about the Health Care bill. The right wing crowded in and shouted down everything and didn't want to listen to anything but there own agenda. And, this, of course, is their tactic. This guy on NPR called them the brown boots.

And, Andy, you'll love this: there is a church on every corner in theSouth. I am always amazed at this honestly. In fact, my grand daughter and I were travelling during church time and I was amazed at how many people went to Church. To give you an idea, in San Fran., it is estimated that at best 15% of the people attend Church. In Spartanburn, SC, probably 90% go to church. Many of the times, I am wrestling with this. trying to figure it out.

And, in the midst, fighting the shingles. You guys better get the shot, I'm telling you. When I get back to CA, I am going to really fight this thing. What is going on now is not working, lots of pain. Dang. But, I am an ex paratrooper, so, let's suck it up.

THE WOLFMAN

OK, are we tracking the Larry man. I like the name Immo has given him, Wolfman. This is no small thing. I can see a book out of it. Way to go Larry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Larry, one of the "girlfriends" is on a 250 mile hike. Hehas been relentless in preparing for the trip. It is one, according to him, of discovery. Mainly, self discovery. Here is a notefrom Immo, who dropped him off to begin the "journey." God bless him.

I dropped Larry and his 60 pound backpack (about 20 pounds of which consisted of his weapons and ammunition) in Yosemite last friday. He was in good spirits and excited about his journey. He is the toughest of us all, by miles!!--attached are some pics of him I took Friday (August 7). Also, if you click on the url below you can see where he is presently on the trail.best. Immo

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=38.011,-119.4896&ll=38.011,-119.4896&ie=UTF8&z=12&om=1

The Generals

**I can understand why you don't have any use for those generals. A colonel at Pope was taken off the job, when according to the folks he worked with, he was one of the best officers they had ever worked with. Apparently the general got mad or for some other crazy reason and decided he would get him out of the way. The only explanation the general gave for his action was that the colonel wasn't effective. Some body is lying and I don't believe it is the people who worked with the colonel. My love to you.

MY OLDER BROTHER AND COUSINS

**A note from my older brother who will take up a "cause" in a minute. One of the reasons that this is very interesting to me is that the "girlfriends" and I were recently discussing the issue and I was telling them that the thing that worried me about our president was that he seemed to be listening to the Generals too much. One of the GFs expressed what many felt: who else can the President rely on for military type stuff? My comments to my brother...

Brother, you are in the ballpark on the generals and it is going to get worst. Rumsfelt's gift to the country was to reorganize the Army in his own image. Naturally, Bush let him do it and so he closed really good military posts and moved them to places like Fort Bragg, which will eventually have 28 generals which is ridiculous. 28 generals on one Post will be a nightmare. Each of them thinking they are somewhere in the Trinity--God, Jesus, Generals and not always in that order. They wouldn't be where they are if they had not been political. Once a general gets pasts one star, it is as political as any politician anywhere. He has to have sponsors, somebody at the higher level looking after him. I can assure you of this, the best leaders in the Army are not the generals. Most of the really good leaders never make it. They size up what is ahead and mostly leave the Service. We are the bigger losers. It isn't that the leadership is bad, just they are not the best. The Generals surround themselves with people who tell them just what they want to hear. They get to believing it and consequently, things happen to the Colonel you're talking about.

If I live long enough, I'm going to write about this sort of stuff: it is terrible. I can't tell you the number of times that I have gone to generals with what I considered ethical and real problems and they gave me the "nobody is home look." Rocking the boat is not a pastime of a general officers, trust me.

It is the one thing that I worry about our president, listening complete;u to the generals. The generals always want more troops and I'm still not convinced we will easily get out of Iraq. What I tell people all the time is that Westmoreland said to Johnson in 68, send me more troops and we'll be home by Christmas. LBJ ramped up the numbers of troops and we did get home by Christmas, unfortunately, it was ten years later. I think the President is smart enough to keep his own counsel. I hope and pray so.