Thursday, July 19, 2007

Real Stories From Iraq

The blogosphere is abuzz about "Shock Troops" a combat "dispatch," published in the current edition of The New Republic. Supposedly the work of a U.S. soldier serving in Iraq, the article details alleged, atrocious behavior by American troops, ranging from running over dogs with Bradley fighting vehicles, to mocking a victim of an IED attack. Michael Goldfarb at the (and others) have been doing yeoman's work in debunking these claims.

In the interest of accuracy (and fairness), we'd like to pass along a true story of U.S. troops, defending freedom in Iraq. It's an unclassified operational summary that was recently provided to friends and family members of soldiers serving in Bravo Troop 5-73 CAV, 82nd ABN DIV. The account details the unit's participation in Operation Ithaca, which was conducted last week. We have absolutely no reason to doubt the accuracy and veracity of this summary, which was forwarded to us by a former colleague. It provides a sharp--and obvious--contrast to the dubious information of "Shock Troops." The 5-73 CAV op summary is long, but well worth the read.


5-73 CAV (TF 300) deployed to Iraq in August 2006 to defeat the insurgency in eastern Diyala, Iraq. 5-73 CAV was formerly 3rd Battalion, 505th Parachute Infantry Regiment, 82nd Airborne Division, but was chosen by the Department of the Army to be the first Airborne Reconnaissance Squadron. The members of the Squadron were hand selected by the Squadron Commander. The Commanders, Officers, Non-commissioned Officers, and soldiers were competitively chosen to be members of this elite force of two time volunteers.

Once established, the members of 5-73 CAV were sent to specialty schools: Ranger School, Recon Surveillance Leaders Course, Air Assault, and EMT to have the necessary skill sets to operate in an austere intelligence environment. Following the specialty schools the Squadron went into an intensive training cycle to prepare for deployment, which culminated in a successful rotation to the Joint Readiness Training Center.

Since deployed to Iraq the Squadron has achieved many successes and experienced some tragedy. Throughout the last twelve months we have conducted operations that have captured international headlines; Operation Turki Bowl I, Operation Turki Bowl II, and Operation Minotaur. 5-73 CAV, now referred to as Task Force 300 (for its 300 fighters) has consistently dominated the enemy through maneuver, saturating the area with patrol bases, patrols, and operations, and the application of Corps and Joint level assets.

On 11 July 2007 Bravo (Strike Force 300) 5-73 CAV moved to the FOB Warhorse Helicopter landing zone during hours of limited visibility to stage on Black Hawk (UH-60) and Chinook (CH-47) helicopters for the Air Assault Raid on Objectives Red, White, and Blue.

The target was an Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQIZ) safe haven north of Baqubah, and east of Khalis, Iraq. Intelligence was developed primarily through local Iraq civilians. Shia’s and Sunnis directed us to this area, which was once a peaceful tribal farm land, but now overrun by Wahabbi extremists under the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI).

The mission was B/ 5-73 CAV conducts Air Assault Raid to clear AQIZ Safe Haven in order to disrupt Anti-Iraq forces operating in the Diyala River valley and shape the area for future operations.

The purpose of the operation was to destroy the AQIZ safe haven to support the larger mission of clearing the Diyala providence.

Concept of the operation was to Isolate the objectives, then clear the objectives forcing the fighters into the open so we could capture them, or if they decided to fight, kill them. With our platoons providing the ground force, aerial support from helicopter gunships and fighter jets and Artillery, we would push them in-between the objective areas and into the palm groves, so we could bring them to justice.

As soon as we hit the ground we began clearing the three separate objectives simultaneously, locating the enemy quickly through various sensors; Paratroopers on the ground, Paratroopers in two Black Hawk Helicopters flying overhead as the Aerial Reaction Force (ARF), Aerial Weapons Team (AH-64 Apaches), F-16 fighters, and Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (TUAVs).

The enemy was surrounded and had nowhere to run. Half of the fighters attempted to flee the objective with weapons, showing a hostile threat to the ground forces and the other half attempted to organize and maneuver on the paratroopers. Immediately we engaged the enemy with direct fire from our machine guns and rifles, a barrage of 155mm High Explosive (HE) Artillery, Apache 30mm Machine Guns and Hellfire rockets, and F-16 20mm strafing runs through their dug in positions.

We cleared from house to house, chicken coops, canals, and palm groves rooting out the enemy and forcing them into our planned kill zone. Along the way we discovered three large caches of RPGs, Heavy Machine Guns, AK-47’s, AQIZ propaganda, Iraqi Army/ police radio’s, military uniforms and over 17 IEDs. The significance of the IED cache is that they are unable to put them on the street, which equals saving coalition and Iraqi lives.

Through the night into the early morning we fought the enemy, dominating them with impunity. The end result was we killed 29 AQIZ fighters, captured 23, and most importantly saved eight severely tortured civilians being held captive. The hostages told us that they had been sentenced by the Islamic State of Iraq to be executed later that day, and we saved them from certain death. All eight hostages who were from all over Iraq are now safely at home with their loved ones.

Our Paratroopers with all of their heavy gear and body armor covered four sq km of ground, clearing over 250 homes, many canals, and palm groves non-stop for eight hours, all while taking fire from a disciplined and determined enemy.

No civilians were killed or injured during this operation, nor any of our Paratroopers. As we were preparing to extract on our helicopters the hostages broke out in tears thanking us over and over. Security was given back to this region, allowing the repatriation of hundreds of families that had been threatened daily, lost family members, and lost the homes that had been in their families for over a hundred years.


We're sure the operational summary wouldn't make the editorial cut at TNR, but at least it's true.


gatorbait said...

I am glad to see the Blues have returned, apparently so has the pink team. Maybe soon we will again see ARA batteries .

The 300! Leonidas is smiling..

karennkc said...

Read Em And Weep
Facts About Bush, Iraq, the USA
That Will Make You Cry


This is Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN) in his admonition of Bush’s apparent detachment from reality:

“The surge must not be an excuse for failing to prepare for the next phase of our involvement in Iraq, whether that is withdrawal, redeployment, or some other option. We saw in 2003 after the initial invasion of Iraq, the disastrous results of failing to plan adequately for contingencies.”

Actually, the administration planned not at all for contingencies. “Declassified reports show that pre-war intelligence reports and summaries accurately predicted the chaos and bloodshed that has engulfed Iraq for the past four years.” Bush, Rumsfeld and their entire rotten cabal did not just ignore these warnings and forge ahead – they made no plans, whatsoever, for the occupation.

“This deck of cards is crashing down and it’s landing heavily on the heads of the soldiers and the Marines who have been deployed again and again while the rest of the country sits back and debates Iraq as an intellectual or emotional exercise.” – Sen. James Webb

Here is a report about the "Broken Army Clock" and a troop drawdown in early '08.,9171,1638454,00.html

Here is a report that urges Iraqis to arm themselves because no one is going to be able to protect them.

Here is a report that says al-Qaida is back in Afghanistan.

Here is a report about how the Marines requested new vehicles two years ago that are better designed against the deadlier IEDs. "Had the new vehicles been available, (Senators Joe Biden and Kit Bond) say, several hundred lives might have been saved."

Here is a report about how the Bush administration was considering the political ramifications of this mess. Nowhere does it mention any concern for the troops - pretty much the same as the war supporters.


Bush Lied 2007

“'The facts are not in question,' the official told The Associated Press, speaking on condition of anonymity because the draft is still under discussion...'The real question is how the White House proceeds with a post-surge strategy in light of the report.'”


Apparently, the White House is going to lie about it. Or, call it spin - Bush says now that eight benchmarks have been met, eight haven't and two could go either way.

As reported earlier in the week, “In a speech in Cleveland, Bush acknowledged that this week’s report would show little progress toward political reconciliation in Iraq…When Bush outlined the surge plan in January, he offered a hopeful vision of the progress he expected from Iraqi leaders. Six months later, none of the benchmarks that Bush discussed has been accomplished.”

That man has put the troops' lives and well-being, the nation's security and our country’s standing on the line to try to save his own reputation.


“A new threat assessment from U.S. counterterrorism analysts says that al-Qaida has used its safe haven along the Afghan-Pakistan border to restore its operating capabilities to a level unseen since the months before Sept. 11, 2001

The findings suggests that the network that launched the most devastating terror attack on U.S. soil has been able to regroup despite nearly six years of bombings, war and other tactics aimed at dismantling it.”


Also, Musharraf is in big trouble in Pakistan and if that state goes radical then we have a bigger problem than before any of this ever happened.

The people of this country had already forgotten about Afghanistan when they took up the campaign against Iraq.

The execution of both wars has been incompetent and negligent and the warnings about Afghanistan have gone unheeded.

The people apparently believe that we are invincible and so have not even paid attention to the facts on the ground – the resources that were diverted from Afghanistan to Iraq were insufficient and now both may be lost.


“The findings could bolster the president's hand at a moment when support on Capitol Hill for the war is eroding and the administration is struggling to defend its decision for a military buildup in Iraq.”


That wouldn't surprise me. Iraq had nothing to do with al-Qaida but the people wanted blood and they are probably still scared enough now that they would be willing to believe anything, thinking if they can win in Iraq somehow (without enough troops) they will have done something to al-Qaida, which is reportedly established in SIXTY countries.

And in spite of the fact that al-Qaida "has been able to regroup despite nearly six years of bombings, war and other tactics aimed at dismantling it."


As a Missourian, I am here to say where the buck stops – President Bush.

I understand the pressure that presidents are under to protect our country from attack. However, that is why we need a leader. A leader who will consider all of the factors as well as the costs and the consequences.

Here is a link "In challenging war's critics, administration tinkers with truth" that spells out the different kinds of intelligence that the president is privy to and the way they have repeatedly misled the American people about it.

Analysts and experts specifically stated before the war that the years-long sanctions and previous military attacks on Iraq could have had a very negative effect on the country and the army and that Iraq could very well be in disarray making the possibility of an insurgency much more likely. There was no shortage of people who analyzed all of the possible scenarios before the war started.

Here is part of a Washington Post timeline that describes the "furious" air strikes in 1998.

· Dec. 17: US strikes at Iraqi targets. Pres Clinton launched the largest military operation of his two terms in office, pairing US and Brit forces against Iraq in what he called a strong, sustained attack from the air against the sources of Hussein military power. Attack sites crucial to weapon-making.

· Dec. 18: US steps up attack on Iraq. The attack by US and Brit forces against Iraq broadened and intensified as salvos of missiles pounded scores of targets throughout Iraq

· Dec. 19: US assessed air strikes spotted damage as American and Brit forces bombarded Iraq for a third straight night, officials in Wash said they were nearing the end of their list of planned targets after striking a series of military sites but also one of Iraq's largest oil refineries, which provided a main source of revenue for the regime. One aim: kill Sadam's palace guard

· Dec. 20: US halts attack on Iraq after four days. Pres Clinton announced a halt to the bombing of Iraq after four nights of furious air strikes, calling the operation a success and sending the long-running conflict with Hussein into a new and uncertain phase Baghdad hides it's wounds

· Dec. 21: US warns Iraq of more raids. US nat'l security advisors said that the US would repeat air strikes to keep Iraq from developing poison gas or germ warfare weapons

Here is a report about the 1999 CentCom war games known as Desert Crossing that pretty much predicted everything that has happened - "'Desert Crossing'1999 Assumed 400,000 Troops and Still a Mess"

Bush made no secret of the fact that he was inexperienced in foreign affairs and so he surrounded himself with the people he thought were the best. They were the “neocons” who had written a paper to overthrow Sadaam many years earlier and they just dusted off that plan and used it as if time stands still in Iraq.

And they put all their money on these exiles (Chalabi - a crook) who had not been in the country for years and who said we would be received as liberators - that was not proven to be true.

It was reported that dissenting views were not "strenuously" presented to the president. Rumsfeld set up his own little CIA inside the CIA to get the "information he wanted." And Cheney was over there DAILY breathing down their necks.

I judged from everything I had read that Iraq at the time of the invasion was relatively at peace - considering the difficulties that were likely to be encountered. Many experts said that Sadaam had been largely "defanged." In fact, there were so many reports cautioning about a quagmire and an insurgency and house-to-house combat and the insufficient number of troops going in that I was literally in shock when they did.

The army has reportedly been shrinking for 35 years - during the administrations of Bush the elder as well as Clinton, who both reduced the army divisions by the same number - and it was Rumsfeld who insisted on a leaner force.

Of course, the U.S. is a superpower and we could probably take on any one. But, they would have to invest much more heavily in equipment than the "lean, mobile, and specialized" army that was the only army that Rumsfeld wanted - not just the only one he had.

And, they would have to have a draft because it appears that people are not so eager to enlist and some are not so eager to reenlist and even officers are not reenlisting at the same rate. It has been reported that the army is “cannibalizing” officers from other branches and some soldiers are doing jobs they were not trained to do.

There have also been reports that new enlistees are not getting the desert training they need before being sent off to combat where they must rely on equipment they are unfamiliar with because all equipment is left behind from former deployments.

There is a “right-wing Kulturkampf” in its own little world on the Internet where the mainstream media (MSM) is not to be believed and where one can just write one’s own reality. The only thing wrong with their idea that the MSM is unreliably biased is that their beliefs have never been shown to be true on the ground.

· There has been a constant shifting of rationale even for the reason for the war - WMDs, liberation, spreading democracy. There has been no progress politically when even military generals say there is no military solution.

· After four years, there are no places in Iraq where the Iraqis have stood up to let us stand down, in fact, the gov't is telling people to arm themselves. Ramadi, “once a killing ground of U.S. Marines” is now a “huge success story,” tribal leaders having turned on al-Qaida and other extremists. However, “Some extremists from Anbar shifted to Diyala province and elsewhere, creating new pockets of violence.” This is known as the “whack-a-mole” counterinsurgency tactic.

· The surge is no surge at all as Petraeus' own counterinsurgency manual calls for as many troops in Baghdad ALONE as are in the entire country.

· al-Qaida, in fact, is in SIXTY countries. How can this strategy (occupation) be effective in dealing with them all?

“Al-Qaida Connections

WASHINGTON | President Bush contended anew Tuesday that the perpetrators of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States are the same as al-Qaida in Iraq.

It was the second time in two weeks that Bush has made the link in an apparent attempt to transform lingering fear of another U.S. terrorist attack into backing for the current buildup of U.S. troops in Iraq.

“Al-Qaida is doing most of the spectacular bombings, trying to incite sectarian violence,” Bush told a business group in Cleveland. “The same people that attacked us on September 11 is a crowd that is now bombing people, killing innocent men, women and children, many of whom are Muslims.”

Al-Qaida in Iraq did not emerge until 2004. While it is inspired by Osama bin Laden’s violent ideology, there is no evidence that the Iraq organization is under the control of the terrorist leader or his top aides, who are thought to be hiding in tribal regions of Pakistan bordering Afghanistan.

Moreover, the two groups have been divided over tactics and strategy.”


The report that says al-Qaida is back in Afghanistan is much more relevant I would think because that is where they train people, there and Pakistan, while our troops in Iraq and the Iraqi people are easy targets.

The war supporters (not troop supporters) are always saying that no one else has a plan. My plan would be to treat the global war on terror for what it is - criminals, extremists who are without a nation state scattered widely throughout the world who would have to be contained by using intelligence and cooperation from the other peoples of the world.

Instead, with his arrogance, Bush has alienated some of the very people we need to rely on. Would you blow NYC to smithereens to wipe out a terrorist on the loose? The war fanatics that are always saying we should indiscriminately bomb the Middle East need to get a grip. That is not going to happen. I don’t know how you could be informed and still think that that is the way to defeat this enemy; “shock and awe” certainly did not do it. And the destruction left behind would bear another crop of extremists.

Nightowl 872 writes:
Every war we have fought since WWII has been "LIMITED". It's been "limited" to keep civilian casualties low. It's been "limited" to keep others from becoming participants even though they send in troops and/or supplies. And it's been "limited" by borders.

Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, even Kosovo.

The right-wing often accuses the other side of moral relativism. How is the above described indiscriminate bombing as well as the ends-justifies-the-means mentality not? Some of us believe that besides being ineffective, we don’t have the right to bring our war on terror to bear on the innocent people of Iraq.

Another favorite scare tactic that the catastrophe-supporters use is to say that al-Qaida wants to see a Democratic president and Congress because they are not as likely to respond in strength if attacked. Gijs de Vries, a former counter-terrorism expert of the Netherlands, said, “One of the time-honored tactics of terrorists is to draw governments into overreacting.” The war in Iraq would certainly qualify for that thousands of American lives as well as $5-6 billion dollars a month – a figure the Bush administration scoffed at before the war.

Also, the calamity-supporters say that we should profile Middle Eastern people at airports and other such venues. It was reported some time ago that al-Qaida was trying to recruit Asians to throw us off, the same with women. That's why you don't profile, that's why you don't assume. You just get it right.

What of the disaster-supporters idea that because of the war in Iraq we haven’t had another terrorist attack? The 9/11 plot reportedly took years to pull off and afterwards security was ratcheted way up. Awareness is way up, too. And it is much easier for them to attack our soldiers right next door.

The tragedy-supporters often ask what would happen upon a precipitous pullout. My hope would be that the terrorists would stop targeting innocent people. As for the sectarian violence and the so-called security vacuum, the Iraqis will just have to sort their differences out or their militias will, just as they are doing now.


There is nothing wrong with patriotism until it takes the place of all reason.
· “Nationalism is an infantile disease” - Albert Einstein.
· Nationalism - Devotion, often chauvinistic, to one's own nation.
· Chauvinism - Militant and vainglorious patriotism. Unreasoning attachment to one's race, group, etc.

Charles Krauthammer, in an ill-tempered rant in Nov. ’03 when the insurgency was heating up in Iraq, said, “The fact is the world hates us for our wealth, our success, our power…The search for logic in anti-Americanism is fruitless. It is in the air the world breathes. Its roots are envy and self-loathing – by peoples who, yearning for modernity but having failed at it, find their one satisfaction in despising modernity’s great exemplar. On Sept. 11, they gave it a rest for a day. Big deal.”

That is unbelievable coming from a highly educated and well-read man who also is a psychiatrist.


The Israeli – Palestinian Conflict

What is the basis for the modern day establishment of the state of Israel? The British were occupiers. The U.N. had only one Arab member and no one even considered how the inhabitants of the land would react – and they reacted violently. They have never accepted this.

My research indicates that there was only an 11% Jewish population in the territory at the time of the U.N. mandate. The Jews did not buy the land. Moreover, their attempts at immigration were stymied by the British – “not least out of a desire to defend British interests in Arab oil.”

The Bible is an ancient religious book, an ancient deed to property. The Jews were the “chosen people” and God, himself, instructed them to kill numerous indigenous tribes, in the entirety, to take the land - the “Promised Land.”

Thousands of years later, the Romans came and tore down the Jewish tabernacle in Jerusalem and they called this place Palestine. That was in the 1st century. A couple of thousand years later Western civilization takes back the land and establishes the state of Israel as according to the Bible.

I am not really talking about ancient history except to point out what I know to be true – that the Bible is the basis for Western civilization's establishment and support of Israel. That is something that occurred in my parent's lifetime, not thousands of years ago. Also, I believe that the Holy War in the Koran is a reaction to the Holy War in the Bible.

The Israeli – Palestinian conflict is clearly at the heart of much of the trouble in the Middle East. But, there has also been a shameful period in America’s history, driven by ambition for superiority and the fear of a “communist threat”…

”…Instead of fulfilling its intended and proper mission, the CIA spent its time organizing and maintaining full-scale armies fighting wars in various parts of Africa, Asia, and Latin America; promoting economic havoc here and there in all three regions; attempting to bring down the foreign governments (those of Guatemala, Nicaragua, Chile, Zaire, Zambia, South and North Vietnam, Iran, Afghanistan, Albania, Cambodia, Laos, Brazil, Guyana, the Dominican Republic, Angola, Cuba, Lebanon, Indonesia, and China, to name a few publicly documented cases) and often succeeding…”i

Additionally, “…both for assuring access to Middle East oil and for other geostrategic reasons, the United States must support Arab strongman regimes (including Sadaam Hussein) and that to do otherwise ‘including to encourage democratization’ could lead either to chaos or the rise to power of hostile forces and, in either case, a severe compromising of American interests.”ii

The U.S. went so far as to stage a coup in Iran in 1953, which resulted in “the establishment of the first American-hating Islamic republic, when the Shiite Muslim clerics duped by the CIA overthrow of Mossadegh master-minded their own takeover in 1979, installing the Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeni.”iii

Once again, the CIA, the oil, the terrorism, the meddling in Iraq and Iran, and the establishment of the state of Israel all happened in my parent's lifetimes. This is not ancient history and Americans should be saddened and ashamed for their country – to deny the truth means this country is a fraud.

i From the Crimes of Patriots, by Jonathan Kwitny
ii The Oslo Syndrome Delusions Of A People Under Siege, Kenneth Levin, 2005 Smith and Kraus, Inc.
iii “…British Petroleum returned to the Iranian oil fields. Some newcomers tagged along. They included five American companies, the ancestors of today’s ExxonMobil and Chevron-Texaco. Meanwhile, the U.S. government opened the foreign-aid spigot. Over the next 25 years, more than $20 billion in U.S. taxpayers’ money would pour into a decidedly undemocratic Iran, most of it military aid and subsidized weapons sales for the Shah’s armed forces and SAVAK, his secret police. As for American oil companies, they would extract 2 billion bbl. of oil from their Iranian fields. But the access came with a stiff price tag in U.S. government dollars and Iranian lives. And the Shah’s oppression led to the establishment of the first American-hating Islamic republic, when the Shiite Muslim clerics duped by the CIA overthrow of Mossadegh master-minded their own takeover in 1979, installing the Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeni.” – By Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele, TIME, May 19, 2003.


The U.S. is an extremely, immensely wealthy nation. If interference was necessary, don't you think we could have done a better job of it than supporting terrorism, starting civil wars and wreaking economic havoc on the people the least able to afford it? I think so.

If America has committed crimes in the past, wouldn’t it be the right thing to do to acknowledge that and condemn it – as we expect others to do – and seek forgiveness? Maybe Christians should ask themselves, “What would Jesus do?”

William Dalrymple, author, says that the ideas propelling the intervention in the Middle East, as most throughout history, are a “bigoted oversimplification of a complex reality.” Does this apply to you?

“Do not fear them, for it is the Lord your God who fights for you.” – Deuteronomy 3:22. This is what you would call Holy War. The Hebrews were “sojourners in an ancient culture.” They were just one tribe among many “primitive, semi nomadic herdsmen,” traders, and “great warring hordes” of marauders migrating through the world’s first great civilizations of Egypt and Mesopotamia. Civilizations that arose in more than 5,000 years before Abraham’s birth.

It is believed that the Hebrews came from Mesopotamia. The tribes of Abraham were traveling throughout the region, they were enslaved, they were set free, they wandered the desert for forty years and then they slaughtered numerous other tribes to take their land, as instructed by God. That is the beginning of Holy War.

I am not making excuses for anybody. I would like to leave all of this ancient history behind. When I said that the Koran was a reaction to the Bible I meant just as the war in Iraq was a reaction to 9/11. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and the people here would like to nuke the Middle East off the map. That is a reaction. Dropping the bomb on Japan was a reaction. (Technically, the targeting of innocent lives is terrorism. Did the way we came into possession of Pearl Harbor have anything to do with us being attacked?)

I personally do not know what things were like when the Koran was written nor do I know how long the Bible had been discussed amongst the other peoples in the region so I do not really know what their perspective was.

Some people cannot comprehend how it is that I conclude that certain aspects of the Bible are the same as the Holy War that the Muslims have. Go back to your Bible and list the times that God instructed the Hebrews to attack and slay tribes or where God, himself, intervened to bring about the desired result. Although this is not construed today to be an ongoing thing, the Promised Land was meant for Abraham and his descendants, alone, forever.

And, apparently, many people still believe that or they would not have stepped in to establish the modern day state of Israel. The Bible is an ancient deed to property. It would not hold up in a court of law. You have the right to believe what you want, but you do not have the right to use the government of the U.S. to enforce those beliefs.

Taken from the opposite perspective, this would be very threatening. And what I mean is that the Koran is modeled after the Bible and although it is perceived to go much further than the Bible and, in fact, it has, it has many similarities to our own "preemptive strategy."

To me, the Christ vs. Mohammed argument is significant. But, the Hebrews did commit many atrocious acts as well. My personal feelings are that Christ changed everything, the Jews rejected him, and I do not really see why the Old Testament and New Testament should belong together. Christians get into the most trouble, usually, trying to reconcile their beliefs with the OT. That's my opinion.


Concerning the mainstream media, some people are capable of objectivity and professionalism. After much consideration and my own personal, unique and extreme experience, it has occurred to me that the MSM has taken a rap for something that really is the bias of the accusers.

For example, people here in Kansas City are quick to jump on a black journalist every time he brings up the "race card." But, they are strangely silent when racism is obviously present. Also, there is the recent criticism of the new British Prime Minister where he has spoken out against stereotyping Muslims. I believe that he is making an effort to mitigate the hateful, inflammatory, racist rhetoric that has been prevalent throughout society and pervasive on the Internet - not trying to appease the terrorists.

These attitudes were present long before 9/11 and could very well be a motivating factor for many of these extremists. And, so, I can logically conclude that many of the attacks on the MSM are in reality a reflection of these diehard mentalities, whether racism, sexism, or whatever ism applies. Some people just do not like, at all, the new "politically correct” and "sensitive" hard fought strictures that are now still fighting for their lives in our media, government, at work and on the street.

These are prejudices that have been ingrained, people need to learn to think for themselves, and even more importantly, look at situations from different perspectives. That is what I did, there was a conflict between my heritage and the religion I was raised with and I threw out everything I had been told and started over from the foundation up. Of course, this requires an actual willingness to treat others as equals.

The American people have been led to believe that we are protecting our "interests" in the Middle East. We have no business, whatsoever, nor have we ever, meddling in the Middle East - not for oil, not for geopolitical purposes, nothing. That is like saying the Arabs have an "interest" in our timberlands or oceanfronts.

I have heard that the U.S. has proven oil reserves enough to last for anywhere from forty to sixty years. While drilling this oil might seem like a wonderful idea to the me-me-me generation and new reserves might be found, it doesn’t leave much hope for the children.


From today’s paper:

“Presidential scholars say the unfinished business Bush will leave for his successor is unprecedented since at least WWII.”

And, “’Wimps.’ – House Minority Leader John Boehner describing fellow GOP lawmakers parting company with the president on the war.

It is not reassuring to know that the future of this country and the lives of our best and brightest are in the hands of people who cannot act like grown-ups.


Finally, please spare me the military machismo. My dad served in WWII, my nephew is a U.S. Marine and I am going to marry a MO National Guardsman and so, I am speaking as a daughter, an aunt who really feels like a mother, as someone who adores her Guardsman and as an American who is concerned for all of their lives and futures as well as the future of this country.


karennkc said...

I realize this is exceptionally long for a post but I could find no other way to reach you.

SwampWoman said...

Geez. I think that previous long spam post needs to be tossed.

As for the article about Shock Troops, I can only shake my hand and laugh because it was apparently written by and for people that have never been in the military.

Thanks for passing along one of the true stories.

Traveling Woman said...

karennkc -- I'm sorry to tell you this, cause I know your heart is in the right place, and you spent lots and lots of time, finding just the quotes you wanted, and then all that cuttin' and pastin'. Well.

But, after the first 10 sentences you posted, I scrolled and scrolled and kept scrolling, getting faster as it seemed to go on and on and on.

Sorry, I didn't read a word. Did you post here cause no one reads your blog?

OmegaPaladin said...


Blogger offers free blogs so you can sound off as much as you want. Your post was irrelevant and annoying. Spook86 didn't mention Bush, and GWB could be the Embodiment of Evil and it would hardly make "Scott Johnson" not be full of crap. Plus, you go over four times longer that Spook86's post, despite the fact that Spook86 include an article. (1062 words for him vs. 4681 words for you) That's just pathetic.

Roofguy said...


Did you wander onto the wrong blog?

Really now, did you expect people that are showing up here, to read the drivel produced by the MSM? I never read that propaganda. The articles produced by NYT et al are simply for those in the choir. There is a choice.

I am appreciative of your family's involvement in our military, if it is true. However so many on the left now claim they care for the military, I guess as to provide some legitimacy for their position. So, whenever I hear someone on the left profess their love of our great military folk, I just dismiss it. Sorry, only read about 1.5 inches. Great effort though.

Tom in CA

Otter said...

karenkc~ I see you only entered Blogger this month, and don't even have a blog to post your recycled lies upon.

Go for it!.... and don't come back. We don't need your 'reaching.'

Coach Mark said...

Excellent report. Appreciate when you post these kinds of things.

Former Spook, I was wondering if you could comment on this piece I finally got up listing hundreds of Saddam loyalists who have been caught working for al Qaeda in Iraq.