The late Cpt Dawe

[Eraedan]

Just found out yesterday that a guy I was friends with during infantry officer training in '99 died this July in Afghanistan. Since I've already written about it, I'll just link to my blog entry.

[Berekona]

So sad to read and then to see that picture of him with his son is even more sad, god I wish this war was over with.

[Eraedan]

Canada is withdrawing as of 2009 its NATO committment to the war in Afghanistan. Canadians are sick of how useless it is.

[Berekona]

atleast you guys are smart, I wish it was sooner then 2009 to show em just how much you guys think this war is useless. Maybe then it would make them open up their eyes more.

[Igorod]

lol, Bush and co? They'll never see anything other than what they want to see, doesn't matter what happens. I hope the Republicans get completely shut down and out in 2008 to send a message to them about what the American public thinks of their idiotic and pointless wars and policies.

[Caviel]

I feel your pain... I was actually friends with Casey Sheehan (Yes that Sheehan). That has to be one of the hardest things I've ever done in my life, watching a friend get lowered into the ground. Really makes you take stock of what you have in life. And thankful that so many died then and now to help keep things that way.

As for the Iraq occupation, I mean war...

[Rathskellar]

I think the really hard part is convincing military people that there is a difference between supporting them and supporting a government policy. I see so many people get upset or angry in letters to the editor, or on forums, or newsclips, because they feel that being against this particular war or administration's policies means that you are against the troops, or at the very least demoralizing them.

I can actually see how news from home might discourage troops overseas. In order to put your life on the line every day, you have to take risks and get yourself psyched up to face the day. I know I would find that difficult to do if I had access to the news on the web etc. and knew that public opinion had swung against the war/occupation, whatever you want to call it.

However, on the other hand, speaking out against our government's policies is inherent in the mechanics of the way we set the republic up, and depending on how you look at it, can be seen as saving lives if it gets the troops out of harm's way in a cause that really isn't worthy of us.

I'm old enough to remember Vietnam and the hangover the country went into afterwards. I think as a society we learned a lot from that experience. Most people who are against the war and this administration's policies have been very careful to emphasize that they support the troops and value their commitment and sacrifice despite being against the war itself. There are no protests (that I have seen) where people are calling the troops "baby killers" etc., and for the most part the troops returning from overseas are not being reviled or ostracized.

Now if we could only get the government that put them in harm's way to care for the wounded troops the way they deserve to be...

[Caviel]

That's pretty much my attitude, support the troops, not the war.

[Eraedan]

That's pretty much my attitude, support the troops, not the war.

EXACTLY!! Thank you both. I always get in trouble when I bitch about various war efforts, but people confuse my irritation with the initiative as also representing my lack of support for those who have to be involved in it. Couldn't be further from the truth. Wars suck, but kudos (and much appreciation) to those who do what's asked of them. Soldiers don't have a choice, politicians do. Yay soldiers, boo politicians.

[Sarsin]

I tell people this:

You can support the troops and not the war. How? The military is a tool, just like a wrench or a hammer. It is an excellent tool for certain kinds of jobs. If you want to drive a nail, a hammer will kick its butt. However, if you try to use a wrench to hammer in a nail and it doesn't work, do you blame the wrench? No, the wrench is still a good tool, you are just using it wrong. You blame the guy using the wrench in the wrong way.
Ergo, when the military is incorrectly used for nation building and policing we should be allowed to complain about the guy using the tool wrong.

[Eraedan]

I tell people this:

You can support the troops and not the war. How? The military is a tool, just like a wrench or a hammer. It is an excellent tool for certain kinds of jobs. If you want to drive a nail, a hammer will kick its butt. However, if you try to use a wrench to hammer in a nail and it doesn't work, do you blame the wrench? No, the wrench is still a good tool, you are just using it wrong. You blame the guy using the wrench in the wrong way.
Ergo, when the military is incorrectly used for nation building and policing we should be allowed to complain about the guy using the tool wrong.

Yes, but you don't blame the hammer when its wielder smashes a hole in the wall just as you don't blame the car when a drunk driver kills a bystander.

Thus I support the tool but rarely the manipulators of the tool.

[Sarsin]

My other favorite pondering for crazy right wing people is: If Iraq is about national security, are you 428 billion dollars safer? Part of being a fiscal conservative (which I subscribe to) is you should understand return of investment (ROI). Is our country every going to see ROI on the estimated 2 trillion dollar cost of this engagement? What other safety measures could we have spent that money on? I bet 2 trillion would have built a hell of a patrol on the southern border, as well as lots more intelligence agents and maybe some nice security on our shipping ports. Maybe we wouldn't be borrowing money out the yin-yang and the value of the dollar wouldn't be dropping.

/rant off

[Melodius]

My other favorite pondering for crazy right wing people is: If Iraq is about national security, are you 428 billion dollars safer? Part of being a fiscal conservative (which I subscribe to) is you should understand return of investment (ROI). Is our country every going to see ROI on the estimated 2 trillion dollar cost of this engagement? What other safety measures could we have spent that money on? I bet 2 trillion would have built a hell of a patrol on the southern border, as well as lots more intelligence agents and maybe some nice security on our shipping ports. Maybe we wouldn't be borrowing money out the yin-yang and the value of the dollar wouldn't be dropping.

/rant off

Have we ever had a ROI from any war? The US ALWAYS goes back and spends millions of dollars rebuilding what we blew up. I just don't understand that reasoning... Spend trillions of dollars fighting and then millions fixing what you broke with BORROWED money.

*smacks his forehead*

[Eraedan]

And as a Canadian, I can't even enjoy the exchange because our f'ing economy hasn't adjusted prices to match reality. Things here are still 10% more expensive than in the States, sometimes as much as 20% more expensive. Yet we're up 10 cents on the US dollar. WTF?

[Rathskellar]

My other favorite pondering for crazy right wing people is: If Iraq is about national security, are you 428 billion dollars safer? Part of being a fiscal conservative (which I subscribe to) is you should understand return of investment (ROI). Is our country every going to see ROI on the estimated 2 trillion dollar cost of this engagement? What other safety measures could we have spent that money on? I bet 2 trillion would have built a hell of a patrol on the southern border, as well as lots more intelligence agents and maybe some nice security on our shipping ports. Maybe we wouldn't be borrowing money out the yin-yang and the value of the dollar wouldn't be dropping.

/rant off

Ah, my friend but here is the rub: there is an ROI, it just doesn't make it back to we the people. The fabled military industrial complex has a few boom years during any war. And not just the primary players, but the ancillary rebuilding contractors that come in after. I hate conspiracy theorists, and I'm not a fan of Oliver Stone, either as a director or a person, but I was forced to watch JFK a few years ago, and ended up fascinated. I never knew all the details of the investigation of his murder, and if what Stone presented is truly factual, there is a pretty fair chance in my opinion that Kennedy was killed because he realized what a mistake he had made by going into Vietnam and was considering pulling out. A lot of important government people had their fingers in the military industrial pie and that nice long war made a lot of people very wealthy. I personally find that kind of blood profit sickening.

That is exactly what the big stink about Cheney and Halliburton was about. Here is a key policymaker with an enormous investment in a key government contractor. And don't think he actually washed his hands of the company anywhere but on paper.

I love my country, I think we have the best form of government on the planet, but there are times when we act like playground bullies thinking we can get away with it because everyone else loves us. We have lost a lot of credibility because of this administration.