Thank the Lord, the political season is maybe close to being over. And, it is time to get to "figure out how to right the country." For what it's worth, I do have one last comment. Rarely in life, do we get a chance to have a "do over" or as they say in golf, a mulligan, or maybe another chance to right a wrong but it appears to me that the state of Georgia has a shot.
In 2002, Saxbe Chambliss absolutely maligned Vietnam vet and triple amputee, Max Cleland, during the Senate campaign. Even John McCain called his comments outrageous. Chambliss called into question Cleland's patriotism. Get the picture, here is a Vietnam vet in a wheelchair, legs been blown off along with one arm and Chambliss questions his patriotism and the voters bought it. Now, they have a chance for a "do over" and I hope they get it right this time.
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Thursday, November 27, 2008
IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN ARE NOT THE SAME
Thanks to David Harris's article in Forum. His book, Coming of Militant Islam is a classic and should be read by every thinking American. I couldn't agree more on Iraq, what a mess. The so called "surge" only worked because we separated the factions and then armed the Sunnis. A strategy that is built on a house of cards. Time to get out and if the Iraqis do not approve the security arrangement, what a lucky break for us. We got rid of Saddam, we declare victory and hit the road. Regardless, we have to get out and let what happens happen.
However, I will have to depart from him on Afghanistan. Even though we are still dealing with a tribal people, we have a chance to restore, relatively speaking, the country. Here's a suggestion: we have a professional Army that constantly needs to be trained. Let's do our training in Afghanistan. The military spends millions of dollars in places like the National Training Center in California. Let's put most of those dollars into Afghanistan for our military. We simply cannot allow the Taliban to own Afghanistan again. Every American woman should be up in arms demanding this.
We have executed a counter insurgency approach that will work and a long term effort has a chance to succeed. This is the real war on terrorism. We are not the Soviets. We have a moral obligation to give Afghanistan a chance, regardless of how long it takes. Our soldiers will get better and better at counter insurgency and so will the Afghans. This can work.
However, I will have to depart from him on Afghanistan. Even though we are still dealing with a tribal people, we have a chance to restore, relatively speaking, the country. Here's a suggestion: we have a professional Army that constantly needs to be trained. Let's do our training in Afghanistan. The military spends millions of dollars in places like the National Training Center in California. Let's put most of those dollars into Afghanistan for our military. We simply cannot allow the Taliban to own Afghanistan again. Every American woman should be up in arms demanding this.
We have executed a counter insurgency approach that will work and a long term effort has a chance to succeed. This is the real war on terrorism. We are not the Soviets. We have a moral obligation to give Afghanistan a chance, regardless of how long it takes. Our soldiers will get better and better at counter insurgency and so will the Afghans. This can work.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
FASCINATING WWll Vets--Can't miss our opportunity to know them.
A couple of nights ago I was talking to these two regular old guys at the VFW mtg ... one did 13 island landings in the Pacific before he finally was relieved and sent home. Another guy landed on France with the infantry and went all the way to Germany, he is in his 80's and ran a half Marathon last month.
the art of listening and engaging these guys is worth the effort, both for them and myself.
I asked the guy who did all the island landings what he thought of Clint Eastwoods film, "Iwo Jima", and if he preferred the American or Japanese perspective? He leaned toward the Japanese (I thought that was an excellent move on Eastwood's part to do that one also). db
When I hear of those like this, I always wonder, what
is their story and I would love to hear it. I ran into an old guy a
few years ago at the Spinaker's Restaurant in Sausalito and he was the chief executioner at the Nurnburg Trials. He didn't tell me this as I was fascinated at watching him. What a character! He was with two fairly attractive and I venture to say younger woman. It was almost impossible not to eavesdrop and after he left, I asked the waiter that I knew who he was.
I could not wait to see him again--drove one of those really expensive Mercedes. Would you believe he died before I saw him again. So, we need to get all these guys stories you can.
jda
the art of listening and engaging these guys is worth the effort, both for them and myself.
I asked the guy who did all the island landings what he thought of Clint Eastwoods film, "Iwo Jima", and if he preferred the American or Japanese perspective? He leaned toward the Japanese (I thought that was an excellent move on Eastwood's part to do that one also). db
When I hear of those like this, I always wonder, what
is their story and I would love to hear it. I ran into an old guy a
few years ago at the Spinaker's Restaurant in Sausalito and he was the chief executioner at the Nurnburg Trials. He didn't tell me this as I was fascinated at watching him. What a character! He was with two fairly attractive and I venture to say younger woman. It was almost impossible not to eavesdrop and after he left, I asked the waiter that I knew who he was.
I could not wait to see him again--drove one of those really expensive Mercedes. Would you believe he died before I saw him again. So, we need to get all these guys stories you can.
jda
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
AND THE MESS ROLLS ON
I knew there was some reason that I liked the general, Petraeus's replacement, given the fact that I'm not usually in the camp of most generals: too political to suit me. And, it sure ain't the new head general in Iraq's good looks. However, now that the Iraqi premier has threatened the good General Odierno with losing his job, I'm liking him better. The General told the Washington Post that intelligence showed Iran attemptimg to bribe Iraqi lawmakers to sabotage the Status of Forces Agreement (basically this is the document that lets us stay in the country--the rub is that the Iraqis want to have charge of our soldiers in case of an American mistake that might involve a civilian or interpretation of the "rules of engagement"--allowing the Iraqis to decide is unthinkable).
Iran and Iraq aligned--makes sense to me. From my prism, anything to get us out of Iraq. We're in a weird position and have been from the "get go." With our latest counter insurgency movement, if you think about it, we've armed and recruited the Sunnis (Awakening Councils), formerly the insurgents, who are now on our side. And, this has brought a relative degree of calm.
However, here is where it gets dicey, think about this: basically we have an official Shiite Army that we are training as our replacements but now beside them, we also have a Sunni Army, armed by us. They hate each other and have for hundreds of years. The Iranians are Shiite, like the government of Iraq and the majority of the country. Hello! And, why would Iran not want us out Dodge and if a few bribes gets us on the next train, so be it.
I'm not the only one who thinks this way, of course, but the author of Unintended Consequences has made this the thesis for an entire book.
Getting out of Iraq has to be a priority. We basically can declare victory: we got rid of Saddam, God bless you, we are gone. According to the author of Unintended Consequences, we have lost the war. I think he's probably right. If our goal is to keep the warring factions apart, staying in Iraq for years might accomplish this. I doubt it but still it could. How long? Well, John McCain says a hundred years.
We are about in as much a mess in the Middle East as we've every been so why not as the GIs use to say about Vietnam when we were there, let's "diddy mal" (get the hay out of here)!!!
Iran and Iraq aligned--makes sense to me. From my prism, anything to get us out of Iraq. We're in a weird position and have been from the "get go." With our latest counter insurgency movement, if you think about it, we've armed and recruited the Sunnis (Awakening Councils), formerly the insurgents, who are now on our side. And, this has brought a relative degree of calm.
However, here is where it gets dicey, think about this: basically we have an official Shiite Army that we are training as our replacements but now beside them, we also have a Sunni Army, armed by us. They hate each other and have for hundreds of years. The Iranians are Shiite, like the government of Iraq and the majority of the country. Hello! And, why would Iran not want us out Dodge and if a few bribes gets us on the next train, so be it.
I'm not the only one who thinks this way, of course, but the author of Unintended Consequences has made this the thesis for an entire book.
Getting out of Iraq has to be a priority. We basically can declare victory: we got rid of Saddam, God bless you, we are gone. According to the author of Unintended Consequences, we have lost the war. I think he's probably right. If our goal is to keep the warring factions apart, staying in Iraq for years might accomplish this. I doubt it but still it could. How long? Well, John McCain says a hundred years.
We are about in as much a mess in the Middle East as we've every been so why not as the GIs use to say about Vietnam when we were there, let's "diddy mal" (get the hay out of here)!!!
Friday, October 10, 2008
FOR WHAT PURPOSE
Recently, my grand daughter and I were at a park in San Francisco and the serenity of a bright and sunny day was disturbed by the screaming overhead of these gloriously precisioned jets, the Blue Angels. They are the Navy's premier flying team, in San Fran for their yearly show called Fleet Week. Watching them practice was thrilling. Wow and more wow is what I thought!
But, later on in the day as I watched the stock market plunge to levels not seen in years, I began to think about the money spent on the "WOW" show of the Blue Angels and how many foreclosed homes that the Blue Angel money could save. And what about things like the trillions spent in Iraq. What about it? What does it all mean? For one thing, it is unbelievably complicated. How could saving on the Blue Angels possibly help the economy. It is the same view of eating one less expensive meal could hardly help the starving in Africa.
Well, it surely is complicated but there has to be some connection to our expenditures on the Blue Angels' air shows, the war in Iraq, all sorts of other things--to say it is too complex is to do or say nothing. Kind of like our present financial crisis, not figuring out how we got where we are is inexcusable: not coming to grips with the spending of millions of dollars on an air show and how it relates, is equally unacceptable.
It all has to be related. Having served at fairly high levels of the military, I use to marvel at the budget process. We operate within a budget. They must spend that money whether they need it or not or guess what? They will not get as much for next year. Spending more is even better (whether you need to or not) and that way you can asked for more.
So, how is it related? The Blue Angels have a budget, it is training and the thinking is that it relates to recruitment, kids will see the WOW of the Blue Angels and run right down and enlist.
We are too smart to simply let things like this continue. The Blue Angels are just symptomatic. I just bet if we were to dedicate ourselves to reining in purposeless spending that doesn't make sense, we could figure it out. These are tough times for the country and everything has to be on the table. Here's a good one, the Iraqis have an 80 billion dollar surplus, we have the worst deficit in history and are in crisis. Yet, we are spending billions a month in Iraq. Hello!!!!!!!!!!! Any North Carolina farmer can tell you how to handle this.
But, later on in the day as I watched the stock market plunge to levels not seen in years, I began to think about the money spent on the "WOW" show of the Blue Angels and how many foreclosed homes that the Blue Angel money could save. And what about things like the trillions spent in Iraq. What about it? What does it all mean? For one thing, it is unbelievably complicated. How could saving on the Blue Angels possibly help the economy. It is the same view of eating one less expensive meal could hardly help the starving in Africa.
Well, it surely is complicated but there has to be some connection to our expenditures on the Blue Angels' air shows, the war in Iraq, all sorts of other things--to say it is too complex is to do or say nothing. Kind of like our present financial crisis, not figuring out how we got where we are is inexcusable: not coming to grips with the spending of millions of dollars on an air show and how it relates, is equally unacceptable.
It all has to be related. Having served at fairly high levels of the military, I use to marvel at the budget process. We operate within a budget. They must spend that money whether they need it or not or guess what? They will not get as much for next year. Spending more is even better (whether you need to or not) and that way you can asked for more.
So, how is it related? The Blue Angels have a budget, it is training and the thinking is that it relates to recruitment, kids will see the WOW of the Blue Angels and run right down and enlist.
We are too smart to simply let things like this continue. The Blue Angels are just symptomatic. I just bet if we were to dedicate ourselves to reining in purposeless spending that doesn't make sense, we could figure it out. These are tough times for the country and everything has to be on the table. Here's a good one, the Iraqis have an 80 billion dollar surplus, we have the worst deficit in history and are in crisis. Yet, we are spending billions a month in Iraq. Hello!!!!!!!!!!! Any North Carolina farmer can tell you how to handle this.
Thursday, October 02, 2008
POLITICALLY USEFUL FEEDBACK
Most of us who frequent the Internet with some regularity are constantly bombarded with forwards, political opinion, adinfinitum. I get really tired of it and have been discussing it with a religious email group in which I participate. One of the members recently chided us for our lack of response. What follows is some of our discussion.
Comment. Thanks for calling this to our attention. We've been remiss. I think for me, it has been a general feeling that our group is so locked in on rigid positions and are spending most of their time watching Fox News, plus forwarding ideas of what a great choice Sarah Palin was that my psyche didn't want to deal with it. I am pulling our chains somewhat. The weird thing about where we are in our country is that if you look at the Republican President, he has gotten every single thing he has asked for, i. e., a gigantic defense bill, not a single word in it about bringing home the troops
Comment. What concerns me, however, are the somewhat useless emails that fly continuously, mostly forwards, many time we don't even know if they are true. And, why anybody would think they are going to sway opinion with some ranting is beyond me.
Comment, replying to a forward. I don't doubt any of this is true; but this is precisely what I'm talking about; forwards like this are not helpful. All politicians are inherently corrupt and or if not quite as bad, are self serving--of both parties: it is simply the way it is. A biased forward has about as much chance of reaching me as flying to the moon. Plus, with the web, it is so easy to find something to reinforce your point. Why not search for areas where we can discuss, i.e., the bailout/rescue of Wall Street. You and I discussing abortion (His comments on terminating a pregnancy--the reasons I can’t support a Democratic candidate for President is because of abortion. It troubles me that the most dangerous place in America for a child is in its mother’s womb). It is like agreeing on the idea of Eternal Security (A Christian Religious term which means that once a person has committed him/herself to Christianity, it is forever sealed), a waste of our time to discuss as well as abortion.
Comment. I believe in soul assignment. This is not original with me but makes sense. When a fetus can live outside the womb, then God assigns a soul and the fetus becomes a person. I could never believe a teenager and his girlfriend in the back seat of a 49 Ford can make an instant baby. Makes no sense to me.
Comment. Here is what I think is helpful: a discussion of the financial mess and what brought us to this point.
Comment. OK, here's a stab at something for us to discuss: In a word, greed! And, for us Calvinists, we should get this with certainty. Man is sorry, good for nothing. Worthless, only through the Lord Jesus is he brought to any sense of redemption. And, even in that, redemption still possesses the rudiment of a sinful nature.
Comment: On a practical basis, through deregulation of the stock market, greedy traders and other worthless pieces of humanity lined their own pockets by lying, creating worthless assets, which they were able to put a value on, uninhibited without anybody minding the store. Then, of course, greedy bankers, many pillars of the church (although they probably didn't tithe) and, of course, the father of derivatives (which is anything that a Wall Street shyster thinks it is) is none other than former Congressman, Phil Gramm, who authored the bill creating derivatives (helped along by Dems and Repubs who lined their pockets): during this heyday, many preachers were preaching the "prosperity gospel. "
Comment. Demos and Repubs alike turned a blind eye while greedy Mortgage bankers let those who follow the late night TV shows on house
flipping think they could make a fortune like the bankers, etc. And, of course there were those poor folks who wanted a piece of the American dream and were greedy too. But, for these poor folks, we can be forgiving as for them they merely want what many of us have.
Comment. Now, this is useful and let's have another side, not some Internet posting, bashing some candidate or putting forth a Rush Limbaugh ranting.
Comment. The flip side of the coin is that I would like to hear some logical views sans the party line why we should put the Republicans back in again based on where the country is.
Comment. My take on the financial mess after reading and trying to understand is off the wall: we need the 700 billion rescue even though we are rewarding those who have caused the mess. If we don't, who is going to be hurt are the poor people. They are surviving on credit cards, etc; it is their safety net; our country is built on credit, at least our economy. We have to continue it although philosophically it may not be the best: it is what we have. For many of us, we can say "let's go to cash, tighten the belt" but the poor folks will fall through the cracks. I feel somewhat the same way about immigration; Lou Dobbs, aside, we can't solve it, let's continue what we are doing which is the best we can. Maybe a new Prez might funnel some bucks to help corruption and drug trafficking and maybe the Mexicans wouldn't want to come here. OK, I am out of hull defoliate.
Comment. Thanks for calling this to our attention. We've been remiss. I think for me, it has been a general feeling that our group is so locked in on rigid positions and are spending most of their time watching Fox News, plus forwarding ideas of what a great choice Sarah Palin was that my psyche didn't want to deal with it. I am pulling our chains somewhat. The weird thing about where we are in our country is that if you look at the Republican President, he has gotten every single thing he has asked for, i. e., a gigantic defense bill, not a single word in it about bringing home the troops
Comment. What concerns me, however, are the somewhat useless emails that fly continuously, mostly forwards, many time we don't even know if they are true. And, why anybody would think they are going to sway opinion with some ranting is beyond me.
Comment, replying to a forward. I don't doubt any of this is true; but this is precisely what I'm talking about; forwards like this are not helpful. All politicians are inherently corrupt and or if not quite as bad, are self serving--of both parties: it is simply the way it is. A biased forward has about as much chance of reaching me as flying to the moon. Plus, with the web, it is so easy to find something to reinforce your point. Why not search for areas where we can discuss, i.e., the bailout/rescue of Wall Street. You and I discussing abortion (His comments on terminating a pregnancy--the reasons I can’t support a Democratic candidate for President is because of abortion. It troubles me that the most dangerous place in America for a child is in its mother’s womb). It is like agreeing on the idea of Eternal Security (A Christian Religious term which means that once a person has committed him/herself to Christianity, it is forever sealed), a waste of our time to discuss as well as abortion.
Comment. I believe in soul assignment. This is not original with me but makes sense. When a fetus can live outside the womb, then God assigns a soul and the fetus becomes a person. I could never believe a teenager and his girlfriend in the back seat of a 49 Ford can make an instant baby. Makes no sense to me.
Comment. Here is what I think is helpful: a discussion of the financial mess and what brought us to this point.
Comment. OK, here's a stab at something for us to discuss: In a word, greed! And, for us Calvinists, we should get this with certainty. Man is sorry, good for nothing. Worthless, only through the Lord Jesus is he brought to any sense of redemption. And, even in that, redemption still possesses the rudiment of a sinful nature.
Comment: On a practical basis, through deregulation of the stock market, greedy traders and other worthless pieces of humanity lined their own pockets by lying, creating worthless assets, which they were able to put a value on, uninhibited without anybody minding the store. Then, of course, greedy bankers, many pillars of the church (although they probably didn't tithe) and, of course, the father of derivatives (which is anything that a Wall Street shyster thinks it is) is none other than former Congressman, Phil Gramm, who authored the bill creating derivatives (helped along by Dems and Repubs who lined their pockets): during this heyday, many preachers were preaching the "prosperity gospel. "
Comment. Demos and Repubs alike turned a blind eye while greedy Mortgage bankers let those who follow the late night TV shows on house
flipping think they could make a fortune like the bankers, etc. And, of course there were those poor folks who wanted a piece of the American dream and were greedy too. But, for these poor folks, we can be forgiving as for them they merely want what many of us have.
Comment. Now, this is useful and let's have another side, not some Internet posting, bashing some candidate or putting forth a Rush Limbaugh ranting.
Comment. The flip side of the coin is that I would like to hear some logical views sans the party line why we should put the Republicans back in again based on where the country is.
Comment. My take on the financial mess after reading and trying to understand is off the wall: we need the 700 billion rescue even though we are rewarding those who have caused the mess. If we don't, who is going to be hurt are the poor people. They are surviving on credit cards, etc; it is their safety net; our country is built on credit, at least our economy. We have to continue it although philosophically it may not be the best: it is what we have. For many of us, we can say "let's go to cash, tighten the belt" but the poor folks will fall through the cracks. I feel somewhat the same way about immigration; Lou Dobbs, aside, we can't solve it, let's continue what we are doing which is the best we can. Maybe a new Prez might funnel some bucks to help corruption and drug trafficking and maybe the Mexicans wouldn't want to come here. OK, I am out of hull defoliate.
Monday, September 29, 2008
BARNEY SAYS
One of my heroes is Barney Franks who is the Democrats "point man" on the bailout fiasco, (which, as of this writing, failed) the House Financial Services Chairman. What endears Barney to me is that he is not terribly unlike Barney and Friends on TV's Discovery Chanel, watched by my three year old granddaughter, Lilly. On TV's Barney, they end with "Barney Says." These are little lessons on living life that 3 year olds get.
Well, in the financial bailout, the bankers and those related who have gotten us into this mess could use a little "Barney says." Most of the bankers should remember "Barney Says" from a former encounter. He was a last minute sub for some big bankers Association. Here they are at this big gathering, waiting to be told how great they are. Barney gets up and "flays the sheep" so to speak. He tells them how sorry they are and how they are responsible for the many ills which Americans face. He tells them they don't care for the poor, adinfinitum. And, just as he is getting warmed up, someone is heard to say, "who invited this guy?"
What makes this amazingly remarkable is that this was several years ago but in light of this present crisis, it is like yesterday. So, what am I saying? Well, along with Warren Buffet (although the majority of the "girlfriends" say that Warren is part of the same group as Paulson and consequently has a vested interest), I trust Barney to keep our best interest at heart.
For most of us, we don't understand how this has happened. We surely can't see into the future to see what might happen if we don't do something. How can we know? The ones who got us into this mess and lined their pockets don't even know. So for now, it is BARNEY SAYS.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
SONS OF IRAQ
The so called "surge" has been touted as the singular aspect of strategy that has literally changed the course of the Iraq war. Not really even as we acknowledge and are grateful for the decrease in violence. But, let us be realistic in what has happened. Plain and simple, a new doctrine of counterinsurgency has been initiated. And, this doctrine in the very beginning is "get the local populace on your side." And, I might add, in any way you can. However, here is the rub: the very idea that the Iraqis will have an acceptable measure of peace is as elusive as ever, even if temporarily, violence is down.
And, here is why. In the latest scenario, the Shiite led government will begin to man checkpoints and in general assume control over the Sunni fighters known as the Sons of Iraq (also called Awakening Councils). These are the guys that were killing Americans when the new strategy was initiated. We paid them to come over to our side. It worked, they quit shooting at us. However, the strategy now stands a good chance of coming unraveled. Lions may lay down with lambs in Biblical analogies but not in Iraq. The strategy can only continue to work if we stay in Iraq forever and back the Sons of Iraq. And, then it is only a "maybe." My view.
And, here is why. In the latest scenario, the Shiite led government will begin to man checkpoints and in general assume control over the Sunni fighters known as the Sons of Iraq (also called Awakening Councils). These are the guys that were killing Americans when the new strategy was initiated. We paid them to come over to our side. It worked, they quit shooting at us. However, the strategy now stands a good chance of coming unraveled. Lions may lay down with lambs in Biblical analogies but not in Iraq. The strategy can only continue to work if we stay in Iraq forever and back the Sons of Iraq. And, then it is only a "maybe." My view.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
THE SOUTH AND POLITICS
Recently, I took a trip back to North Carolina to see my brothers. I do this about every three months or so. I knew that it was going to be hard to avoid politics but didn't realize truly how difficult it would be. Politically, most are not on a different planet, rather a different galaxy. I have to shake my head because of this "sea change." Growing up, simply everybody was a Democrat. On this trip, I felt like what someone once said, "A lonely wanderer on a wind swept sea." There were a few times when I would be in a room full of people and be the only Democrat, two shakes from being "stoned." For my brothers, other than me, my Dad is turning over in his grave repeatedly. And, the idea of how the South has changed would not hack it with him. Sorry Dad.
There is simply no reasoning to their position. I gave my view of "forget the candidates, tell me one thing that is right with the country." Do we want four more years of "W." NO COMMENT. And, I follow with the idea that when things happen on a person's watch, even if it is politics, the leader has to take the "hit." The nobody's home look. I usually follow with the idea that I hope this is not prejudice since we have a black man running for President. "Oh no, everybody insist." Yes, I believe that .
There is simply no reasoning to their position. I gave my view of "forget the candidates, tell me one thing that is right with the country." Do we want four more years of "W." NO COMMENT. And, I follow with the idea that when things happen on a person's watch, even if it is politics, the leader has to take the "hit." The nobody's home look. I usually follow with the idea that I hope this is not prejudice since we have a black man running for President. "Oh no, everybody insist." Yes, I believe that .
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
HOW THE COUNTRY HAS CHANGED
When 9-11 happened, I, along with the rest of the country, wondered what our country would look like once we figured it out. We still don't know but something a friend said resonated with me at the time and is still with me: "9-11 has forever changed our country and everybody in it and anybody who has anything to do with America."
This has proven to be true. One of the very subtle ways I think the country has changed is the perpetual suspicion which is a part of our lives: suspicions of those who are different. Here's an example: On the bus, as I was crossing the Golden Gate Bridge, I glanced up and noticed a woman in a burka and beyond us, coming toward the bridge, very close, was a gigantic container ship: my first thought: how ironic that I'm in a bus with a Muslim woman, crossing the GG Bridge and my first thought is terrorism. It is in our psyche, a completely new phenomena, only since 9-11. Can any of us say that when see someone, a different look, someone we perceive to be Muslim, that our minds don't take us to Suspiciousville.
Other things, of course, remind us that life has forever changed. For one thing, two wars going on with the continuing reminders of young Americans dying, not to mention, Iraqi and Afghan innocents being blown up with regularity. (These events may have left the front pages of our newspapers but they are still going on). And, my personal pick, Gitmo where we are still holding low level types acting like they are major terrorists.
On a personal basis, I think that we simply have to protect ourselves the very best we can and then not worry about it. It is the only way to preserve our American way of life. God bless those who gave their lives in whatever ways on that fateful day of 9-11!
This has proven to be true. One of the very subtle ways I think the country has changed is the perpetual suspicion which is a part of our lives: suspicions of those who are different. Here's an example: On the bus, as I was crossing the Golden Gate Bridge, I glanced up and noticed a woman in a burka and beyond us, coming toward the bridge, very close, was a gigantic container ship: my first thought: how ironic that I'm in a bus with a Muslim woman, crossing the GG Bridge and my first thought is terrorism. It is in our psyche, a completely new phenomena, only since 9-11. Can any of us say that when see someone, a different look, someone we perceive to be Muslim, that our minds don't take us to Suspiciousville.
Other things, of course, remind us that life has forever changed. For one thing, two wars going on with the continuing reminders of young Americans dying, not to mention, Iraqi and Afghan innocents being blown up with regularity. (These events may have left the front pages of our newspapers but they are still going on). And, my personal pick, Gitmo where we are still holding low level types acting like they are major terrorists.
On a personal basis, I think that we simply have to protect ourselves the very best we can and then not worry about it. It is the only way to preserve our American way of life. God bless those who gave their lives in whatever ways on that fateful day of 9-11!
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
NOT A GOOD MOVE BARACH
When the framers of the Constitution made a conscious effort to separate the church from the state, there was a reason. And, we have a good example from Jesus when He was confronted by the Pharisees with the notion of church and state. His quote was simple and to the point, even providing an illustration, he took a coin and asked, “Whose picture is on the coin? Caesar. “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and the things that are God’s to God”. Makes sense to me.
How we have gotten ourselves to this point is beyond me. The idea that preachers can wield such power is baffling. Having studied the old time preachers, they never seemed to get into politics and yet to be fair, they didn’t have the temptation of the media either.
Billy Graham seems to be the first media religious darling to any degree. I always liked him. He never did get away from his basic message but then again, he didn’t dispute his influence either. Surely didn’t refuse an invite to the White House.
To me, it is hard to say what this religious forum means: a potential president appearing before a preacher to be questioned about his religious beliefs. Seems unseemly to me. Well, this is what my Mom would say.
The flip side of the coin is that those like Rick Warren can only be given influence and power in politics by those like Obama and McCain. I surely don’t blame those like Warren. In a sense, be is the pastor of a mega church with a slant on interpreting what Jesus meant. These gigantic mega churches usually are part church, part entertainment. I don’t care for them very much but they seem to meet many people’s need and I want to be fair. Mostly in my view, they are church/gospel/Bible lite.
THE PURPOSE DRIVEN LIFE
Warren’s book, The Purpose Driven Life, which I’ve read is OK as a guide for living but if people really wanted to get a formula for making it in this world and into the next, they should read the four Biblical gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John which are what Jesus said and did. Unfortunately, in Church culture, most people had rather take the shortcut of listening to a preacher say what Jesus said and did. The few times I’ve been in dialogue with the clergy and they have given me the word, “Jesus said such and such or God says: ” my usual retort is, “Where does it say that God says this?” End of discussion usually!
I don’t fault Warren for this coup of getting Barach and McCain to acknowledge the perceived importance of the “right wing” mostly. They are politicians, afterall. HELLO!!
I think probably these mega church pastors are fighting to be the titular head and Warren seems to be the front runner. Others have bit the dust in various ways: Falwell has gone on to his reward. Ted Haggard left Colorado after the gay masseuse scene, the Focus on the Family 's James Dobson has become a one issue type: gays are taking over the world; and the Texas syrupy pastor Osteen’s wife is flying first class and accused of assaulting a flight attendant. So, we have Warren.
A BOOK WHICH IS A MARVEL IN MARKETING
To me, his book is the interesting thing. It is a marketing phenomena and mark me jealous. It started off with everybody in his church buying a copy or several. Then covering the entire country with promotion. All the evangelical churches bought copies and developed courses around the book, a 40 day spiritual journey that will change the reader's life was the so called, "purpose." An entire cottage industry has grown up around it. It has sold millions, reported to the various sources like the NY Times best sellers' list and the book reinvents itself over and over.
THE POTENTIAL PRESIDENT SHOULD HAVE RESISTED
Barach should have resisted. It was natural for McCain as his party routinely panders to the right wing as a part of their persona. I fear Barach is being handled already. What he didn’t get is that he can’t win these people over. It can’t be done. A kind of “Don’t confuse me with facts, I have my mind made up” exist with them. "Right wing" (in terms of social issues, I don't see any difference in the terms, right wing and evangelical) Christians have certain issues: abortion, gay marriage, prayer in the schools, stem cell research, and various other fringe ideas. These good folks are not going to change their minds. They are willing to have a war that is bankrupting us, the worse deficit in history with the very real possibility of sacrificing our children and grandchildren’s future--a litany of negatives: a spiraling down economy where no one really knows the bottom, hard working folks losing their homes,the dollar falls and falls, inflation is moving upward and lastly something totally inexplicable, an amazing blindness to reality. If only they can have a candidate to champion their issues, to hell with all this other stuff.
Obama would have been better to have said, “I respectfully decline. If I attend, it gives the impression that I am choosing one expression of faith over another. Our country has always prided ourselves on freedom of religion or no religion at all. Thank you for your invitation and may the God of your choice bless you."
How we have gotten ourselves to this point is beyond me. The idea that preachers can wield such power is baffling. Having studied the old time preachers, they never seemed to get into politics and yet to be fair, they didn’t have the temptation of the media either.
Billy Graham seems to be the first media religious darling to any degree. I always liked him. He never did get away from his basic message but then again, he didn’t dispute his influence either. Surely didn’t refuse an invite to the White House.
To me, it is hard to say what this religious forum means: a potential president appearing before a preacher to be questioned about his religious beliefs. Seems unseemly to me. Well, this is what my Mom would say.
The flip side of the coin is that those like Rick Warren can only be given influence and power in politics by those like Obama and McCain. I surely don’t blame those like Warren. In a sense, be is the pastor of a mega church with a slant on interpreting what Jesus meant. These gigantic mega churches usually are part church, part entertainment. I don’t care for them very much but they seem to meet many people’s need and I want to be fair. Mostly in my view, they are church/gospel/Bible lite.
THE PURPOSE DRIVEN LIFE
Warren’s book, The Purpose Driven Life, which I’ve read is OK as a guide for living but if people really wanted to get a formula for making it in this world and into the next, they should read the four Biblical gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John which are what Jesus said and did. Unfortunately, in Church culture, most people had rather take the shortcut of listening to a preacher say what Jesus said and did. The few times I’ve been in dialogue with the clergy and they have given me the word, “Jesus said such and such or God says: ” my usual retort is, “Where does it say that God says this?” End of discussion usually!
I don’t fault Warren for this coup of getting Barach and McCain to acknowledge the perceived importance of the “right wing” mostly. They are politicians, afterall. HELLO!!
I think probably these mega church pastors are fighting to be the titular head and Warren seems to be the front runner. Others have bit the dust in various ways: Falwell has gone on to his reward. Ted Haggard left Colorado after the gay masseuse scene, the Focus on the Family 's James Dobson has become a one issue type: gays are taking over the world; and the Texas syrupy pastor Osteen’s wife is flying first class and accused of assaulting a flight attendant. So, we have Warren.
A BOOK WHICH IS A MARVEL IN MARKETING
To me, his book is the interesting thing. It is a marketing phenomena and mark me jealous. It started off with everybody in his church buying a copy or several. Then covering the entire country with promotion. All the evangelical churches bought copies and developed courses around the book, a 40 day spiritual journey that will change the reader's life was the so called, "purpose." An entire cottage industry has grown up around it. It has sold millions, reported to the various sources like the NY Times best sellers' list and the book reinvents itself over and over.
THE POTENTIAL PRESIDENT SHOULD HAVE RESISTED
Barach should have resisted. It was natural for McCain as his party routinely panders to the right wing as a part of their persona. I fear Barach is being handled already. What he didn’t get is that he can’t win these people over. It can’t be done. A kind of “Don’t confuse me with facts, I have my mind made up” exist with them. "Right wing" (in terms of social issues, I don't see any difference in the terms, right wing and evangelical) Christians have certain issues: abortion, gay marriage, prayer in the schools, stem cell research, and various other fringe ideas. These good folks are not going to change their minds. They are willing to have a war that is bankrupting us, the worse deficit in history with the very real possibility of sacrificing our children and grandchildren’s future--a litany of negatives: a spiraling down economy where no one really knows the bottom, hard working folks losing their homes,the dollar falls and falls, inflation is moving upward and lastly something totally inexplicable, an amazing blindness to reality. If only they can have a candidate to champion their issues, to hell with all this other stuff.
Obama would have been better to have said, “I respectfully decline. If I attend, it gives the impression that I am choosing one expression of faith over another. Our country has always prided ourselves on freedom of religion or no religion at all. Thank you for your invitation and may the God of your choice bless you."
Thursday, August 14, 2008
DEMOCRACY IN IRAQ IS A FAIRY TALE
Sometimes you read something and you reread and suddenly, it is "ah hah." I recently had this with an article in the New York Times Magazine. It seems of late that all my stuff comes from there. Why? Well, not so but they do in depth articles for one thing and the editors obviously don’t mind giving a writer a few pages, not the usual 500 words or less. This piece, The Last Battle (The Fight Among Iraq's Shiites) by Michael Gordon, is probably the best thing I've read about Iraq: succinct and puts us where we are NOW after all the millions of dollars and lives given.
The article had to do with a team called Phoenix, not after another infamous Phoenix, I don’t think. (The CIA engineered project for assassinating enemy combatants in Vietnam). The Phoenix Team had to do with these 3 young captains that General Petraeus had recruited to work with Sunnis and Shiites to create a greater sense of security, provide some jobs through a neighborhood watch program, and in general, be his eyes and ears in a region of the country that seemed the most conducive to employing General Petraeus' counter insurgency philosophy.
I was very impressed that the good general would be this open, creative and very protective of these three young soldiers who were not career types, although true believers. There has to be an amazing "back story" to this project. Here are three soldiers: a female Lieutenant, later Captain; another, having done several tours in Iraq; a Harvard graduate--and, an enlisted guy who could have been an officer but through some idealistic view wanted to be an enlisted man, later became a Sergeant. Their connections to Petraeus, to each other, to the Marines and ultimately to this story is almost too much to believe. I don't, for a moment, doubt the veracity of the story but there has to be more to how it all came to be. Well, for one thing, it makes for a good story. The flip side of the coin is that what they attempted when fleshed out to the possibilities is equally amazing. I simply will accept it at face value. It is a story that needs to be read.
The article is too long and involved to fully convey the gist of it, even if I wanted too. Several lessons to learn from the message: the military should not be put in a position to make promises or offer incentives that they cannot deliver. Reminds me so much of Vietnam. We made all these promises to the people and in the final analysis, didn’t deliver.
But, more than anything, what The Last Battle pointed out was the overwhelming complexity that we are in the middle of in Iraq: tribes, sheiks, political alliances, fanatical believers, you name it. It is simply an impossible venue for democracy. Here's a thought: the best we can hope for is that a kinder Saddam and surely less crazy, might emerge. The Last Battle reinforces that any idea of a democracy as we know it is a will of the wisp fairy tale.
The article had to do with a team called Phoenix, not after another infamous Phoenix, I don’t think. (The CIA engineered project for assassinating enemy combatants in Vietnam). The Phoenix Team had to do with these 3 young captains that General Petraeus had recruited to work with Sunnis and Shiites to create a greater sense of security, provide some jobs through a neighborhood watch program, and in general, be his eyes and ears in a region of the country that seemed the most conducive to employing General Petraeus' counter insurgency philosophy.
I was very impressed that the good general would be this open, creative and very protective of these three young soldiers who were not career types, although true believers. There has to be an amazing "back story" to this project. Here are three soldiers: a female Lieutenant, later Captain; another, having done several tours in Iraq; a Harvard graduate--and, an enlisted guy who could have been an officer but through some idealistic view wanted to be an enlisted man, later became a Sergeant. Their connections to Petraeus, to each other, to the Marines and ultimately to this story is almost too much to believe. I don't, for a moment, doubt the veracity of the story but there has to be more to how it all came to be. Well, for one thing, it makes for a good story. The flip side of the coin is that what they attempted when fleshed out to the possibilities is equally amazing. I simply will accept it at face value. It is a story that needs to be read.
The article is too long and involved to fully convey the gist of it, even if I wanted too. Several lessons to learn from the message: the military should not be put in a position to make promises or offer incentives that they cannot deliver. Reminds me so much of Vietnam. We made all these promises to the people and in the final analysis, didn’t deliver.
But, more than anything, what The Last Battle pointed out was the overwhelming complexity that we are in the middle of in Iraq: tribes, sheiks, political alliances, fanatical believers, you name it. It is simply an impossible venue for democracy. Here's a thought: the best we can hope for is that a kinder Saddam and surely less crazy, might emerge. The Last Battle reinforces that any idea of a democracy as we know it is a will of the wisp fairy tale.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
A SPIN MASTER BELIEVING HIS SPIN
For one who finds it hard to give the President much slack, I will have to say that he did a good interview at the Olympics. They didn’t talk only sports but all the hot button front burner topics to include the Russian/Geogian conflict.
I often wonder how much these interviews are scripted. Maybe Bob Costas but the President sounded pretty candid. His main theme had to do with staying engaged with China and the idea that we wouldn’t agree on all things but we would on some--talked about how far China has come and watching the Olympics who could not agree with that assessment. And, it has been good that the president has been at the Olympics. He is the President. And, here the Office transcends the man.
There's a slight side of me that feels a little sorry for him. As one who voted for him during his first term, I thought of the great hope he brought. The country was in pretty good shape. And, even with the uneven performance of the "Bill" man, he was inheriting a no deficit economy and money in the bank. And, even though a disputed election, still I applauded the Supreme Court decision, let's get on with it.
And, then 9-11. At first, he seemed to be on top of it and came Afghanistan and the country applauded. At this point, I think, he got overwhelmed by the NeoCons, Chaney and crew. From there, a series of disasters which have brought him to the end of his term as one who blew his chances--mismanagement of the Iraqi war that will be debated for years, regardless of how we get out of it, “Was it worth it?”
Listening to him talk to Costas, I thought: no credibility to talk about the Russian/Georgian conflict: castigating them on an idea of Regime Change. Hello! The most disturbing thing is when Costas tried to inject some reality on our country's challenges and the President's spin of "we don't have problems." This is a theme of denial which has costs him his legacy I think. The greatest problem is when a "spin master" believes his spin. America's a great country but we have beau coup problems and to deny them is not to face them.
Monday, August 04, 2008
THESE PEOPLE ARE OUR GARDNERS, TAKE CARE OF OUR CHILDREN, DO THE THINGS WE DON'T WANT TO DO. MOST OF THE TIME, THEY ARE INVISIBLE
When I was in the Army at Fort Bliss, Texas at El Paso with Juarez, Mexico, just over the border. We use to regularly get lectures about the pitfalls of crossing the border, especially if we drove: the possible accident, the laws of Mexico, the mordita, the payoff. In fact, when you went to Mexico, you regularly took a handful of dollars to pay off anybody who resembled authority.
The intrusion of politics in what to do about Mexicans crossing the border illegally, the numbers already illegally here, etc. have become big political issues. There's the intrepid vigilante group, the Minute Men and let's not forget the National Guard confronting the "would be" border crossers.
I do readily admit that when you are not directly involved, it is easier cogitate your navel. A friend of mine who lives on the edge of the desert close to Sierra Vista, Arizona has tale after tale of Mexicans crossing his property and trashing it. You would think, according to my friend, all our problems stem from South of the Border. Well, hardly.
It is a problem but not insoluable. Movies are one venue to get a handle on the problems and the directions to go. We should pay more attention. One movie, Bordertown, does what movies are suppose to do, at least what I like, instruct and tell a good and compelling story or confront a societal problem. Bordertowm does all of these. It is about the murders of young women working in the factories on Juarez, going home alone at night, being attacked, murdered and their bodies buried in the desert. Some estimates say that thousands have died.
Bordertowm took on NAFDA, Mexican profiteers working these poor women, often way to young, for pittance in wages, no protection at night--the rich getting richer on the backs of the poor.
As movies go, there are a few implausible things but the movie does its job in bringing the problems to light. Jennifer Lopez, as an actress, is good I think. I don't know why she gets panned so much, probably reviewers can't separate singer/lifestyle from her job. Damned if I know.
This is the third movie I think which does a good job with issues of immigration from Mexico and highlights problems. Jack Nicholson's, The Border, was one: Three Burials of Estrada was another one. And, who can forget the hopelessness and happenstance of a wonderfully sweet Mexican nanny in Babel.
A book called The Reapers Line speaks to the same issue and absolutely one of the best books I've ever read in highlighting the real border problem which is DRUGS. Although about drug interdiction, it hit the migration issue and hard. One of the best statements on the subject, something like, "The problem with our immigration policy isn't the poor Mexicans trying to gain a better life for their families but those who are profiting from them like the drug lords,etc." What we may need to root out corruption is Denzel Washington in Men On Fire. Denzel confronts kidnapping in Mexico where he kills everybody but the director.
The final hit has to be our own lack of common sense in our approach to our neighbors to the South. If we took a fraction of the money we have wasted in Iraq to root out corruption in Mexico, improve the possibilities for the workers, they wouldn't want to come to the U. S. Will we do anything? I doubt it but movies like Bordertown keep trying.
The intrusion of politics in what to do about Mexicans crossing the border illegally, the numbers already illegally here, etc. have become big political issues. There's the intrepid vigilante group, the Minute Men and let's not forget the National Guard confronting the "would be" border crossers.
I do readily admit that when you are not directly involved, it is easier cogitate your navel. A friend of mine who lives on the edge of the desert close to Sierra Vista, Arizona has tale after tale of Mexicans crossing his property and trashing it. You would think, according to my friend, all our problems stem from South of the Border. Well, hardly.
It is a problem but not insoluable. Movies are one venue to get a handle on the problems and the directions to go. We should pay more attention. One movie, Bordertown, does what movies are suppose to do, at least what I like, instruct and tell a good and compelling story or confront a societal problem. Bordertowm does all of these. It is about the murders of young women working in the factories on Juarez, going home alone at night, being attacked, murdered and their bodies buried in the desert. Some estimates say that thousands have died.
Bordertowm took on NAFDA, Mexican profiteers working these poor women, often way to young, for pittance in wages, no protection at night--the rich getting richer on the backs of the poor.
As movies go, there are a few implausible things but the movie does its job in bringing the problems to light. Jennifer Lopez, as an actress, is good I think. I don't know why she gets panned so much, probably reviewers can't separate singer/lifestyle from her job. Damned if I know.
This is the third movie I think which does a good job with issues of immigration from Mexico and highlights problems. Jack Nicholson's, The Border, was one: Three Burials of Estrada was another one. And, who can forget the hopelessness and happenstance of a wonderfully sweet Mexican nanny in Babel.
A book called The Reapers Line speaks to the same issue and absolutely one of the best books I've ever read in highlighting the real border problem which is DRUGS. Although about drug interdiction, it hit the migration issue and hard. One of the best statements on the subject, something like, "The problem with our immigration policy isn't the poor Mexicans trying to gain a better life for their families but those who are profiting from them like the drug lords,etc." What we may need to root out corruption is Denzel Washington in Men On Fire. Denzel confronts kidnapping in Mexico where he kills everybody but the director.
The final hit has to be our own lack of common sense in our approach to our neighbors to the South. If we took a fraction of the money we have wasted in Iraq to root out corruption in Mexico, improve the possibilities for the workers, they wouldn't want to come to the U. S. Will we do anything? I doubt it but movies like Bordertown keep trying.
Sunday, August 03, 2008
SCREWING UP A TWO CAR FUNERAL PROCESSION
My High School English teacher, Ms Dixon, use to chide us about the world situation by saying something like, “You can never accomplish anything in life unless you get lighting flashing mad". She's right on! I recently read one of those pieces in the New York Times Magazine that made me lighting flashing mad--Is Afghanistan A Narco-State? It was written by Thomas Schweich, a former senior counter narcotics official in Afghanistan. He seems to know what he's talking about and is taking on the supplier of 90 percent of the world's heroin: Afghanistan. Basically, the good professor (he's now a prof. of law at Georgetown U) says that we weren’t allowed to eradicate the opium fields in Afghanistan because of corruption at the highest levels and a myth that had been perpetuated intentionally that poor farmers are driven to raise poppies as their only livelihood: take away that and we hurt them. According to this article, not so, quite the opposite, the wealthy war lords in the South of the country are making big time bucks from poppies while in actuality the poorer farmers in the North of the country have reverted to traditional crops like veggies, cotton, and wheat and are already making great headway. The wealthy farmer/warlords/profiteers in the South are putting big bucks in their pockets, not to mention the Taliban raking in millions to finance their war efforts.
There were so many disturbing things about this article: the first glaring one is that Schweich would write it to begin with; a high muckedy muck with a good case for how we are screwing up. His patience with the corruption, based on the article, astounded me. The article may be written from his perspective but there is no doubting that he knows what he's talking about and is taking a risk. The second big discouraging issue coming from the article, is the continuing fact that it is a wonder that we ever get anything done given the egos and turf issues, to include the military. Rarely does anyone say “for the good of the country,” or accomplishing the overall mission as opposed to saying what is in it for me or how will this help or hurt my career. And, for me, it is reaffirmed that the present U.S. Administration (Condi Rice came out looking pretty good in the article and let's give her credit) could screw up a two car funeral procession.
From the article, one has to conclude that Afghanistan has become a country where it is only a matter of time until it reverts to where it was or worse, like so many places in our world, self interests trump the people and the good of the country.
Friday, July 25, 2008
COMMON SENSE
Examples of the lack of common sense abound us daily. However, on the public stage, there seems to suddenly be an epidemic. Think of the Texas cop who arrested a nine months pregnant illegal, handcuffs and chains her to the bed. (He did have a little help in all this stupidity, however with supervisors). The mother eventually delivers her child, which is promptly taken away from the mother by other brilliant Texans--a whole series of sans common sense actions. It is Texas, however which may serve as some excuse.
And, now taking a cue from the Texas mental giants, some Air Force generals siphoned off millions of dollars from terrorism money to build luxury planes to haul other generals around. This, of course, on top of flying nukes all around the nation while some of their other compatriots are found to be napping on the job.
Let's see what happens to these guys--anybody this stupid needs to get the ax but doubly so since they are suppose to be protecting us. Honestly, it is as though the Air Force's top military brass has been taken over by an alien force at worst or brains bottled in formaldehyde at best. HELP!
And, now taking a cue from the Texas mental giants, some Air Force generals siphoned off millions of dollars from terrorism money to build luxury planes to haul other generals around. This, of course, on top of flying nukes all around the nation while some of their other compatriots are found to be napping on the job.
Let's see what happens to these guys--anybody this stupid needs to get the ax but doubly so since they are suppose to be protecting us. Honestly, it is as though the Air Force's top military brass has been taken over by an alien force at worst or brains bottled in formaldehyde at best. HELP!
SWIFT BOAT VETS AND PAT TILLMAN
These are two stories that won't go away. The first one is the infamous Swift
Boats Vets and how they were used for political purpose. John Kerry won't let it go! Somehow his honor is tied up in it. I understand. Did it cost him the Presidency? I don't think so. It is kind of like a last ditch field goal in a hard fought football game--wouldn't be a problem if the field goal was not the difference. The election was probably lost in other ways. If the contest had already been decided, the Swift Boat Vets would have been a non issue.
Regardless, the Swiftboat Vets were used at least as I see it. Although John Kerry's tour of duty and awards didn't fit a usual pattern, his awards were in order. And, if you know the military, nothing is left to chance in the awards arena: everything is verified--Witnesses have to be produced--no chance. The Swiftboat Vets, with their own agendas, either lied or didn't think. Had they been thinking, I would like to hope that they would have given a fellow vet the benefit of the doubt. They didn't. Their main funder, T Boone Pickins, appears to have switched course. Come on, John, LET IT GO!!!!!!
The second story that hangs on is the Tillman friendly fire incident. I get it. On the part of his Mother, who has authored a book--it has to be grief--we surely understand.
Nothing could or will replace her son. However, I doubt that blaming
his fellow Rangers, the Army, God, whoever will take care of the
grief. Having read lots of the material, official and otherwise, it
was an accident which may have been prevented. But, in war, all the scenarios are off the table. When you are in the fields of fire, anything can and does happen.
I don't know what happened. What I do think might have surfaced for some who were there, they wanted to preserve Sergeant Tillman's hero statue. In the Nam, we did it when we had too and nobody questioned it. Often, they could have. Being killed by the enemy is a heck of a lot better than killed by your own.
Did the Army lie? Probably, somebody did but it doesn't change anything. Grief is a powerful emotion and sometimes people have to do what they have to do to get past it. Could be this is what Ms. Tillman is doing. God bless her.
Boats Vets and how they were used for political purpose. John Kerry won't let it go! Somehow his honor is tied up in it. I understand. Did it cost him the Presidency? I don't think so. It is kind of like a last ditch field goal in a hard fought football game--wouldn't be a problem if the field goal was not the difference. The election was probably lost in other ways. If the contest had already been decided, the Swift Boat Vets would have been a non issue.
Regardless, the Swiftboat Vets were used at least as I see it. Although John Kerry's tour of duty and awards didn't fit a usual pattern, his awards were in order. And, if you know the military, nothing is left to chance in the awards arena: everything is verified--Witnesses have to be produced--no chance. The Swiftboat Vets, with their own agendas, either lied or didn't think. Had they been thinking, I would like to hope that they would have given a fellow vet the benefit of the doubt. They didn't. Their main funder, T Boone Pickins, appears to have switched course. Come on, John, LET IT GO!!!!!!
The second story that hangs on is the Tillman friendly fire incident. I get it. On the part of his Mother, who has authored a book--it has to be grief--we surely understand.
Nothing could or will replace her son. However, I doubt that blaming
his fellow Rangers, the Army, God, whoever will take care of the
grief. Having read lots of the material, official and otherwise, it
was an accident which may have been prevented. But, in war, all the scenarios are off the table. When you are in the fields of fire, anything can and does happen.
I don't know what happened. What I do think might have surfaced for some who were there, they wanted to preserve Sergeant Tillman's hero statue. In the Nam, we did it when we had too and nobody questioned it. Often, they could have. Being killed by the enemy is a heck of a lot better than killed by your own.
Did the Army lie? Probably, somebody did but it doesn't change anything. Grief is a powerful emotion and sometimes people have to do what they have to do to get past it. Could be this is what Ms. Tillman is doing. God bless her.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
VOLUNTEER ARMY-Boon or Bust
This is the anniversary of the Volunteer Army: 35 years. I would not have known it had not the Chief of staff of the Army, General George Casey, called our attention to it. Instead of touting the success of the Volunteer Army, he should have been apologizing for leading us down the primrose path.
What the military is charged with at the higher levels is making sure that we are prepared for any military contingency. The generals have failed miserably. During the cold war, they went for a smaller Army and were literally seduced by high tech. They said we were prepared by producing a gaggle of slogans even as Casey has: sustain, prepare, reset, transform--what the hell does that mean? Some civilians have spent days coming up with it. Every new Chief needs some gimmick. How about this, admitting that a Volunteer Military, even though good, cannot sustain us when we are in a prolonged war.
What we now know is that Casey and other generals have been willing to claim success of the Volunteer Army and by doing so have put us in an incredibly precarious situation. They accepted plans for a war in Iraq with an inadequate force, creating untenable choices for our soldiers.
Multiple tours of duty have become the rule rather than the exception. Problems abound, i. e., suicide, divorce, PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder) in varying forms. If our Army isn't broken, it is close. Policies like Stop Loss and forcing Guard and Reserve troops to perform missions for which they are not trained or ill equipped is tantamount to unforgiven--think Abu Grabib. Almost every single difficulty we face with our military today can be placed at the feet of the top Generals , plain and simple.
Although I understand the generals retiring from The Forces and writing books telling their true view: what went wrong, adinfinitum--any way served up, however, comes out somewhat disingenuous. For once, I'd like to see just one general say with clarity and no military speak the real truth is: the Volunteer Army simple is not working, in our present war footing nor will it likely work in the future.
What the military is charged with at the higher levels is making sure that we are prepared for any military contingency. The generals have failed miserably. During the cold war, they went for a smaller Army and were literally seduced by high tech. They said we were prepared by producing a gaggle of slogans even as Casey has: sustain, prepare, reset, transform--what the hell does that mean? Some civilians have spent days coming up with it. Every new Chief needs some gimmick. How about this, admitting that a Volunteer Military, even though good, cannot sustain us when we are in a prolonged war.
What we now know is that Casey and other generals have been willing to claim success of the Volunteer Army and by doing so have put us in an incredibly precarious situation. They accepted plans for a war in Iraq with an inadequate force, creating untenable choices for our soldiers.
Multiple tours of duty have become the rule rather than the exception. Problems abound, i. e., suicide, divorce, PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder) in varying forms. If our Army isn't broken, it is close. Policies like Stop Loss and forcing Guard and Reserve troops to perform missions for which they are not trained or ill equipped is tantamount to unforgiven--think Abu Grabib. Almost every single difficulty we face with our military today can be placed at the feet of the top Generals , plain and simple.
Although I understand the generals retiring from The Forces and writing books telling their true view: what went wrong, adinfinitum--any way served up, however, comes out somewhat disingenuous. For once, I'd like to see just one general say with clarity and no military speak the real truth is: the Volunteer Army simple is not working, in our present war footing nor will it likely work in the future.
Monday, July 14, 2008
WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE
I once had a blog called, Most Americans Are Stupid. I did away with it after the last elections mainly because the voting public surprised me. I had become jaded on the idea that our President had poll numbers almost like he does today and still got elected. My big thing was the war--how could we be so stupid after Vietnam to get ourselves into an impossible situation like Iraq. Hence, I had the need to write about it in a blog, but after the election and regaining faith in my fellow Americans, in honor of them, I deleted the blog, not that anyone was staying up nights reading it anyway.
I feel like in many ways, it is time for the blog again. Why? Well, Rush Limbaugh for one thing. Honestly, talk about fluxmoxxed. Here is a guy who was a dope head and should have gone to jail. He used his maid to get the drugs for him and yet he is supposedly in command of a 40 mil salary per year with 20 million listeners daily. Who are these people who would listen to this guy? The NY Times Magazine did a centerpiece on him a couple of weeks ago. I was amazed--to give such a guy this much ink is amazing and reduces in statue a magazine like the Times by at least 50% in my mind.
Still, this many Americans listening to anything this blowhard has to say simply floors me. In the same somewhat category is Howard Stern--how does it happen! He almost commands an entire radio hemisphere and yet, if you were to remove the "F" word and a few others, his vocabulary would be reduced by about fifty percent. Crude is not even close to the word. Who are these people who listen to this guy? And, in my biased view, the best we can hope for is that these listerners of these bigoted a'holes don't vote. Maybe it is time for my blog back again!
I feel like in many ways, it is time for the blog again. Why? Well, Rush Limbaugh for one thing. Honestly, talk about fluxmoxxed. Here is a guy who was a dope head and should have gone to jail. He used his maid to get the drugs for him and yet he is supposedly in command of a 40 mil salary per year with 20 million listeners daily. Who are these people who would listen to this guy? The NY Times Magazine did a centerpiece on him a couple of weeks ago. I was amazed--to give such a guy this much ink is amazing and reduces in statue a magazine like the Times by at least 50% in my mind.
Still, this many Americans listening to anything this blowhard has to say simply floors me. In the same somewhat category is Howard Stern--how does it happen! He almost commands an entire radio hemisphere and yet, if you were to remove the "F" word and a few others, his vocabulary would be reduced by about fifty percent. Crude is not even close to the word. Who are these people who listen to this guy? And, in my biased view, the best we can hope for is that these listerners of these bigoted a'holes don't vote. Maybe it is time for my blog back again!
Saturday, July 12, 2008
A PHILOSOPHY OF GIVING
***I’m sorry I can’t send you a personal email but with over 2,600 individuals in our address book it just isn’t practical. I hope you understand?
As is the case each summer, I am offering you a special gift in return for helping us through the dog days of summer. This is the time of the year when donations drop-off dramatically. It happens every summer. So, I have an incentive to consider sending something extra this month to help Vets With A Mission through the summer shortfall. On a first-come, first-donation received basis of $100 or more, as long as supplies last, you get your choice of one of the following books:
PS: If you would like to make a donation online through our secure web site click here: http://www.vwam.com/donations_usa.htm . Then send me an email to vetswithamission@backroads.net and let me know which book you would like.
***The above excerpt from an email gave me a chance to define my own view of giving.
I've expressed this view before but as usual, no one was listening--I like the idea of giving to individuals as opposed to organizations. This isn't always practical and organizations have to come into play but even with that, a person should follow the gifts and know where the money is going. Usually, the tax deduction issue comes up. Individuals have to decide on how important it is: personally, I don't think it's very important.
The little nonprofit that I'm involved with, Vietvets Family Project, has built two schools in Vietnam, plus a language lab in the old Cholon section of Saigon. We don't raise money, just word of mouth in case somebody wants to give to someone and run it through us, i. e., like a student. (Don't even know if this is legal, as we've never done it but sure that other nonprofits do). The worker bees, of VVFP, me and two other Vietvets, keep it simple.
This is not a pitch but just follows the idea of giving to individuals. A couple of the "girlfriends" gave this gal with terminal cancer a few bucks, as Andy says, a "C" note, to help her with expenses as she was going to Santa Monica for treatment. This was good and they got points but should have given a few thousand as they could afford it.
My basic view is that most people are pretty selfish and don't give. To be a little kinder and not appear judgemental, let me say it this way: most people simply don't think much about sharing their bountiful resources and they don't. I have stories but will spare you.
OK I'm ending this treatise as I'm certain you are hanging on every word.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)