Today is a day to remember and thank all of our brave men and women who have served (or are still serving) this country in uniform. Please remember them in your thoughts, deeds, and words today.
For my Dad who served 22 years in the Army and spent more than his share of time on foreign soil serving this country and protecting American freedom and ideals: Thanks, Pop! You did a job that most us cannot even begin to fathom, risked your own life many times to get supplies out to the field, delivered many soldiers home from the battlefront so they could return home to their last resting places, and saw many things that will stay with you forever. Many Americans did not understand your sacrifice during Vietnam and you were "rewarded" with their hate and discontent upon your return. You deserved so much better. If nothing else, know that your daughter understands and appreciates all you have done in the service of our great nation. I love you and appreciate you more than I'll ever be able to express in words.
For my Mom who also served 22 years in the Army as an Army wife and stalwart supporter of our family and our Dad: Thanks, Mom! You did a job that would overwhelm most women. There were many times that you had to be all things to all of your family while Dad was overseas. While watching over our family and quelling the fears of your children for their Dad's safety, you stood strongly by his side at all times. You did a job that you were often not thanked enough for and there are no words today that are adequate to thank you properly. I love you and appreciate you for everything you are to all of us every day.
Happy Veterans Day to all!
For my Dad who served 22 years in the Army and spent more than his share of time on foreign soil serving this country and protecting American freedom and ideals: Thanks, Pop! You did a job that most us cannot even begin to fathom, risked your own life many times to get supplies out to the field, delivered many soldiers home from the battlefront so they could return home to their last resting places, and saw many things that will stay with you forever. Many Americans did not understand your sacrifice during Vietnam and you were "rewarded" with their hate and discontent upon your return. You deserved so much better. If nothing else, know that your daughter understands and appreciates all you have done in the service of our great nation. I love you and appreciate you more than I'll ever be able to express in words.
For my Mom who also served 22 years in the Army as an Army wife and stalwart supporter of our family and our Dad: Thanks, Mom! You did a job that would overwhelm most women. There were many times that you had to be all things to all of your family while Dad was overseas. While watching over our family and quelling the fears of your children for their Dad's safety, you stood strongly by his side at all times. You did a job that you were often not thanked enough for and there are no words today that are adequate to thank you properly. I love you and appreciate you for everything you are to all of us every day.
Happy Veterans Day to all!
Comments
I didn't know about your site but Mark Nickolas mentioned it on his, so I wandered by.
First,
Thank you for honoring our service men and women; every generation of my family has served in uniform, including myself. In fact my father is buried in a national cemetary. I'm curious, how do you reconcile your former post on the election being a win for Al Qaeda with former Soldiers like myself who have been life long Democratic party members?
Just to give you an idea of my perspective, my personal experience is not limited to the military, but I also have an academic background in the study of History and policy. Plus I'm a native Kentuckian; my family has been here since the French-Indian War.
Like most folks I prefer civil conversation; so I look forward to your response.
I, like you, prefer civil conversation and have no use for anything other than that when the topic is sometimes volatile.
You need not thank me for honoring veterans. I do it from the heart every year and more. Military service has been a tradition in my family as well. I was born into an Army family and in an earlier chapter of my life I was a Navy wife; I know all too well the sacrifices made by servicemembers and their families. It's hard and thankless work. I am ever grateful for patriots like you and those in my life who do it.
So, to your question: How do I reconcile my post about the election being a win for Al Qaeda with former soldiers like you who have been lifelong Democrats?
I don't reconcile it at all. It's really quite impossible. I like to think that Americans are united to secure and ensure our freedoms, our liberties, and our safety. You exercise your right to support the political ideology of your choice at the polls as do I (a lifelong Conservative, not necessarily a lifelong Republican). That's as it should be; it's the American way.
The problem I have in reconciling the results of the election to the American way of life is that Al Qaeda and other Islamo-fascist entities have plainly stated in communique after communique that they will win their jihad in the American media. As far as I'm concerned, they won their war right here on our shores through our media and its influence on our elections.
Americans have an annoyingly small attention span when it comes to history. I imagine you would know better about that than I. The writings and media broadcasts of Al Qaeda leadership since before the events of 9/11/01 informed all of us of their intent -- to win their war in our media first so that the American political will to win is extinguished.
Anyone who wanted to look at the enemy we face and honestly evaluate the threat they pose, understand their tactics, and revisit history for its lessons had only to spend some time on MEMRI (www.memri.org) to read the last 4-5 years of their writings and broadcasts. They lay it all out for us so very clearly and we as Americans fell for it.
I feel sure that lifelong Democrats and lifelong Republicans both took their eyes off the ball in our current conflict; sadly, I think we may all be losers in the long run.
The new leadership in the House and Senate have stated plainly that we will have a "redeployment" to look forward to now. Maybe that's good news for some of us; however, I can assure you it's even better news to our enemies. They have the patience that we lack.
From a soldier's perspective, what is your take on that? I'm very curious. Do you see the Dem plan of "redeployment" and Pelosi's reference to this war as a "situation to solve" rather than a war to win as a little disconnected from the battle at hand? Seriously, I'm not asking in a glib manner. (It's hard to tell from text on a page.) I'm asking because you seem to have a civility about you that isn't often present when a Democrat visits this blog -- I think your perspective would be interesting not only to me but to other readers as well.
Thanks again for stopping by and I do hope you'll do so again. I welcome the discussion and the different perspective.
Thanks for the response. It’s difficult for me to separate out my military background from my education when discussing the War on Terror or Iraq. Personally I was writing letters to the editor on the dangers of the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden long before 911, so for me a lot of this is just the realization of the worst case scenario.
I think the fundamental problem with our war in Iraq is that it was unnecessary. There are many ways to skin a cat and if the goal was to take out Saddam Hussein, then it could have been done way more cheaply and effectively. I view the War in Iraq as a distraction in our effort to reign in radical Islamic terrorists.
Before the war, combat veterans like General of the Army Eric Shenseki, former JCS Colin Powell and General Norman Schwarzkopf warned of the danger in doing an half baked job; specifically when it came to troop levels- and their warnings proved to be dead on. And to be frank, when it comes to making tactical and theatre decisions regarding war, you need a guy with blood on his hands who knows what he’s doing to draw up the plan.
Second you need a plan to sustain the peace- something we leaned painfully in WWI, and put into practice after WWII.
Redeployment in Iraq will put our troops strategically where they need to be to increase their own safety, but prevent Iran from trying to make Iraq its satellite. Your question about ‘winning the war’ is really the key to the whole thing- what does victory look like?
If Victory is defeating Saddam- then we’ve already won so let’s bring our folks home.
If Victory is an Iraqi Democratic government- I think this would be almost impossible to achieve in the current climate; not just because of internal religious differences, but ethnic divisions such as with the Kurds in the north; which is a whole other problem.
Is there something in between that can be called ‘victory’?
I’m speaking at the 40,000 foot level right now, because the details of this conflict are so complex that I don’t think one person can do justice to the topic.
What do I want? Here it is in order-
1) OBL dead and Al Qaeda destroyed.
2) Our troops redeployed to a safer area of operation while Iraq stabilizes; not out of the theatre, just out of harms way where they have the advantage.
3) Iran bracketed by the international community to discourage its nuclear ambitions.
4) North Korea bracketed by the international community to discourage its nuclear ambitions- because nothing is more dangerous than a cornered rabid dog like Kim il Jong.
I guess the bottom line is ‘militarily’ our Soldiers are the best in the world and have succeed way beyond what is to be expected given the troop levels and equipment issues they’ve had to deal with. Planners as far back as Bush 41 said it would take 400,000 US Soldiers to stabilize Iraq after a war given their population of approximately 27 million.
So far the maximum amount of US troops at any one time has been 170,000- and the bulk of those were not war fighters of the Combat Arms. Simply put redeployment gives us options we don’t have now.
Our Soldiers, Marines, Airman and Sailors are a treasure to be safeguarded until absolute need- Iraq as it stands is a drain on the cream of our crop so we need a new plan. We need to get back on track using all our resources- diplomacy, commerce and military to effective the kind of changes we want to further the cause of peace.
Sorry for the long winded response- I hope this gives you some idea on my line of thinking.
I think it’s time for the bright minds on both sides of the aisle to start working on this problem- and to have the best interest of the country as a guiding principle.
Brad
A blog where the hostess does not make-up false stories about politcians, no name calling... refreshing indeed.
Brad makes the most valid point of all with respect to the Iraq war. It was unnecessary. Dawn, you make a valid point as well, both dems & reps took their eyes off the ball.
I think that we took our eyes off the ball pre 9/11 and unfortunately, we took our eyes off the ball again when we were led into war with data that had not been fully substantiated. Now, we have not only seen a blood bath in Iraq, we are beginning to see the bloody days return to Afghanistan.
It is my belief that if we deploy the men from Iraq to Afghanistan we would be much better off. Too many people globally think that Bush went to Iraq just for oil. Whether that is true or false, we can never know for certain. That hurt our reputation globally.
As you say Dawn, we did take our eyes off the ball.
PS. Thank you for a peaceful place to post.
PPS. Some dems & reps don't use their names for many reasons. Crazy world we live in.
Thank you so much for a very informative and thoughtful post! That is exactly what I was hoping for. What a treasure you are! Even though the mention on Mark's blog brought a number of Leftwing automatons to my blog, I'll gladly suffer their nonsense just for one reader/commenter like you and the fellow who posted just after you! Hallelujah and my thanks to Mark for pointing you both this way.
I want to respond at length later -- work and commentary don't mix well at the moment!
By the way, thanks for giving a name to your comments. I think of the comments as a conversation, and it always seems odd to me to have a conversation with a nameless person.
More later this evening with regard to your comments... I'm really looking forward to trading ideas and thoughts on this!
All the best,
Dawn
Thanks for your kind comment, by the way. I appreciate people of all political ideologies who can have civilized discourse. I think all major political ideologies that are at play in American politics these days have common goals; we simply disagree on the tactics to use to achieve them.
Your explanation of what a "phased redeployment" might look like and why it might be a good idea certain gives me some encouragement. I hope that the Dems on the Hill are considering it in the same way that you have laid it out. My fear is that it is simply a less-defeatist label being used to disguise an intent of total withdrawl. I guess that remains to be seen.
The four things you outlined as what you want from this war could not possibly be more in line with what I (and I'm sure many Americans) want from it. Number 1 on your list is a clear cut and achievable goal. The question is: Do Americans have the patience and the fortitude to continue this war long enough to achieve it?
As for items 3 and 4 on your list, I wonder how we'll define success in those areas. North Korea and Iran are squirrelly customers... loads of inflammatory rhetoric with somewhat unverifiable claims. I think the involvement of China in the talks with North Korea is sheer genius. Which country might be a good pressure point for Iran? With the right pressure applied by a country of importance to Iran, it might be achievable.
It seems to me that the only thing that separates us is our choice of political affiliation. Evidently, we are very similar in our attitudes on national defense and what victory looks like in this war.
Where we differ, I think, is that I saw the opening of an Iraqi front in this war as a pre-emptive tactic to safeguard against the very real possibility that Hussein was planning to provide some nasty weapons to Al Qaeda and other Islamo-fascist entities to use against our troops in Afghanistan. Evidently many people now believe that Hussein had no WMD; however, I've seen enough investigative information (granted, through freelance journalists mostly) that I am convinced he had them and was intent on selling them to our enemies.
Could we have taken him out more quietly and prevented utilizing so many of our forces in Iraq? I don't know. I would hope that attempts were made to do just that prior to deciding to go in full force later. Maybe given a few years distance when this war is over we'll find out more about that.
If the "true" plan was to draw Islamo-fascist fighters into Iraq from all regions so that we could concentrate the fight in one spot, it's apparently not worked as well as was hoped. That sounded good initially but Americans don't have the patience to wait that out. And, as you said, we needed more troops on the ground in Iraq if we were to take them all down in an expedient manner.
I wholeheartedly agree that it's time for people on both sides of the aisle to "have the best interest of the country as a guiding principle." Whatever became of that guiding principle in the first place? After years of heinous terrorist attacks on Americans, it took a giant spectacle of tragedy like that on 9/11/01 to finally bring this nation together. That mindset didn't last long, did it?
I suppose, in the long run, it will be people like us who can agree on common goals with regard to the best interests of this country (regardless of party affiliation) who will keep that line of unity in communication open.
Brad, never apologize for a "long-winded" response! There are opinions and then there are informed opinions. I value informed opinions above all. I'm a firm believer that it takes whatever words it takes to make your points clear. Clarity is missing in most discourse these days and it's refreshing to find it anywhere! One of these days, I'll have to get a comment module that provides more real estate for the construction of comments -- this little box is a royal pain in the arse!
Kadnine -- if you happen to read this comment thread, I hope you'll add to this discussion. He's another person who's served and has some very informed opinions that you might find interesting.
Brad, thanks for restoring my faith in civil discourse between Americans. I look forward to your comments.
The country was totally unified after 9/11/01. As to the idea that the mindset didn't last long, I do take exception to that to some degree.
We (the citizens of this country) LOVE this country as was indicated by the flags waving and patriotic gestures in every city in America. That patriotic mindset has not gone away. We are all still and will be forever patriotic and love this country.
The issue is not the mindset of the citizens, the issue is the "distractions" from politicians with different ideas on what they believe are best for the country. Even if we disagree on "what" is best for the country we all are still very patriotic.
That is AWESOME!
john
Thank you for the kind words.
I agree that dealing with terrorism requires a long term commitment as well as a long term plan. My understanding of Iraq’s political secular structure under Saddam had him at odds with Al Qaeda for several reasons, not the least of which is that SH would not let a Islamist rival power structure develop under his regime. Moreover I think SH intentionally over played how much WMD capability he had, to keep his potential enemies in the region (Iran, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait) guessing.
Phased redeployment will keep troops in the region, but not in the shooting gallery of Iraq’s urban areas. Moving some troops to Afghanistan will not only put pressure on Iran, but give us an opportunity to once and for all kill OBL. My understanding is we will maintain 14 forward area bases inside Iraq for the foreseeable future. But our troops will be in defensible areas that allow us to bring the full weight of combined arms against anyone moving against them.
Once the political situation resolves among the Iraqi’s they’ll still have to talk to us about their next step. If they go too far toward a Radical Islamic government we can easily decapitate the leadership until there is a moderate voice we can work with. Turkey is a good example. Even though they have drifted toward a more Islamic influenced government, the military (through Coup interventions) and the secular leaders keep that movement directed away from radicalism. I’m not advocating this, but they are a NATO country and have acted as a good ally in most matters. Their biggest problem is one we will have to address in some form and that is what to do with the Kurds.
As far as pressuring Iran, the triumvirate of power in the region is made up of Turkey, Israel and Iran; any combination of the two can effect a change of policy on the third. I recommend a book by UK professor Robert Olsen- a Middle East expert who helped to write the CIA regional NIE for the president- ‘Turkey-Iran Relations 1979-2004’.
Since we had complete control over Iraqi airspace from the first Gulf War and the strength of that alliance behind it- I truly think the current war was unnecessary. We could have implemented several long term strategies to contain Hussein or overthrow him that wouldn’t have cost us the current number of lives and casualties. North Korea has always been a bigger threat than Iraq, yet we have been content to contain them. I think the Iraq war was gross miscalculation with extremely poor planning at best.
I think Americans do have the patience for a conflict they view as necessary- but I don’t think Iraq meets that criteria.
I think the use of ‘preemptive war’ is a very slippery slope; the Japanese used this line of thinking when they struck Pearl Harbor. I don’t have a problem with ‘preemptive or punitive strikes’- such as Reagan used against Gaddafi in Libya or Clinton against Milosevic in Bosnia- but not a war. And it’s easy enough for a government to manufacture a reason- Gulf of Tonkin incident’; ‘Polish Radio Station’.
The Flypaper Strategy you mentioned was truly a fool’s paradise- all we have done in that regard is create a live fire training ground for terrorists- who can enter and leave the country as they wish. In my view we need to hunt them down- not sit around hoping they come to Iraq to fight us.
This of course is just my opinion.
Finally; thanks for hearing me out, Dawn. I guess my hope is that you can see, like I do, that we really do have shared goals when it comes to National Security and Defense. And I think there are many areas where Americans can broadly agree on goals that represent the values we all have in common.
From reading your other posts I think one of the basic differences in our perspective is that I think good government can be a positive force for more than just security and building roads. I think it can help to create opportunities in education and industry that will allow ‘all boats to rise together’.
Best of Luck,
Brad
I see the sense in a possible redeployment of our forces in that area. Finding and killing bin Laden will still be quite a struggle though. Have you read about Pakistan's agreement to give up Waziristan to Al Qaeda? I was dumbfounded when I read that! It's right on the Afghan border and now it's basically the new HQ for bin Laden and company. Maybe that will help us locate him but then again maybe that development will provide him with safe haven to rebuild his forces and redeploy them as well.
I will definitely check into the book you recommended. I find the history of power and conflicts in the Middle East fascinating. Cradle of civilization and some pretty tough fighters... I do hope you're right about Americans having the patience to see this thing through because we'll need it. Even if the Iraq front had never been opened, we will still be fighting this war wherever it finds us for years and years.
We do seem to have the same values when it comes to National Security and Defense. That's very comforting to me because I don't often encounter shared values in this area with those on the Left anymore. There was a time but it just seems to have changed quite a lot.
I suppose our chosen political ideologies will have quite a stretch to be able to ever see eye to eye on the role of federal government. I think both parties agree that there must be some form of social services to help citizens in crisis and I do agree with that; however, it's the long-term strategy that bothers me. Seems to me that we ought to make that type of support very clear cut and on a timeline so that people know they'll be helped but will also know there's an end to the obligation. I could go on and on with this topic but I'll stop there for now. I'm sure to be posting more about those issues (role of government, social responsibility, etc.) as time goes on. So many areas of interest, so little time!