-Caveat Lector- >As a result, if my comments are "naive and simple minded", then > yours must be labeled equally close-minded and arrogant.
No. It is perceptive, not close minded and arrogant to recognize a 'naive and simple minded' opinion > It is close-minded and arrogant to base an evaluation of every situation > facing our nation on a single rule of experience, especially when that > situation results in the US using military force. If everyone employed > such a rule, then the WWII lesson to ending an international crisis > would be to just drop a couple of nukes and then invade. Yes that would be true except drawing cogent comparisons is not the same as basing "an evaluation of every situation facin our nation on a single rule of experience". > I am not of the Vietnam generation, and as a result I have the luxury of > looking at that conflict as a historical lesson rather than a personal > experience. I agree that Vietnam was a poorly conceptualized, poorly > executed, and poorly finished military campaign that had dubious origins > to begin with. And I have the benefit of actually living the event rather then reading it through the subjective perception of historians and propagandists. >I also know that our experience in Vietnam generally ensures that we will not make >a mistake like it for a long time to come. The absolute certainty of what you 'know' is impressive and sadly very wrong. > That is why I find it to be so close-minded and arrogant that someone of > that era would automatically assume that, just because a current conflict is not >totally popular or is difficult, it will automatically be 'like Vietnam'. The popularity or difficulty of the foolish Iraq Occupation is not the issue. The issue is that the nation was deceived by its leaders into a war and debilitating occupation with a third rate country in order to further a hidden agenda. Don't take my word for it, paraphrasing Wolfowitz, 'We knew the compelling reasons to occupy Iraq would not be accepted by the American people but they would buy the claim of WMD." > I can understand that you are disheartened if you truly have this view. > It must be disheartening to think that your entire government and > military is populated with people like me. No not the 'entire government' nor the 'military'. The 'government' is merely a collection of people who happen to control the levers of power at this particular time. Friends and acquaintances who are active or recent military have told me this Iraq occupation is not popular with the grunts, just the 'true believers'. My experience is the 'true believers' were generally REMF's. > So, basically anyone who disagrees with you should be barred for participating in >the democratic process?The problem is that I do disagree. I have been there and >have served,and I still disagree. What makes your point of view more enlightened? Apparently healthy sarcasm is no longer experienced in Basic Training. > I never said that it would free us from our commitment. I said it will > free us from the commitment of maintaining UN commitments that were > failing and were never designed to succeed. I also believe it freed us > to act as we see fit, rather than waiting for the inevitably slow > mechanizations of a world community that will never agree on how to > handle major problems that affect the world before they become so > overwhelming that someone must act (cite NATO and Kosovo). What UN commitments are you speaking of that we must be freed from? What the hell does NATO and Kosovo mean to the country? Who cares about NATO and Kosovo. The Cold War has been over for 15 years. Why are we in NATO? Why did we go to Kosovo? To empower the Albanian mafia? Why are US taxpayers subsidizing the defense of Europe? > Compared to what stage? We waged a twelve year long containment campaign > without a single combat casualty caused by the Iraqis. Vietnam suffered > an average of 15 KIAs per day during the combat proper from 1965-1973. > The combat proper for Iraq (I will be generous and include both before > and after major combat actions) is right around 2 per day. It will take > us 80 years to equal the combat deaths in Vietnam. If we are still in > Iraq 80 years from now, then I will be forced to agree with you. Give it time. We have been kicking sand fleas in Iraq for less then one year. Over 600 killed and probably 10,000 casualties, many terribly so, legs, arms, eyes, blown to hell. $200 BBBillion already pissed away. Surely you are aware of how the Pentagon juices the figures. Guess it is OK to be cavalier about it, unless of course it is YOUR balls that get blown off. > How is that reality any better than the one you insinuate? Instead of > acting on conscience, we will stand by and watch our position as one of > the world's most powerful nations be eroded by our unwillingness to act > decisively in a time of crisis? Beside the fact that, if Washington was > really running Iraq, it really would be the debacle you envision. Thank > God it is not. Acting on concience? Man, what can you possibly mean? Please tell me how we were 'acting on concience'??? What time of crisis? Don't you get it? Bin Laden's gang did 9/11 NOT SADDAM. Don't tell me you still believe in the magical WMD's? BTW, WMD's is a phony propaganda term. The only 'real' WMD according to official US military doctrine is nuclear weaponry. But of course Bush II was probably looking for the gas and bacteriological weapons his ole man gave Saddam in the 1980's when he was our 'good buddy' - along with the billions in US Govt AID loans. > I can make this assurance with good conscience because the military I > serve in is nothing like the one you were forced to endure. We are an > all-volunteer military force. I also was a volunteer and volunteered for Viet Nam. <Every member is here because he or she wants to be. Most of us are dedicated to >our mission and would go into harms way at a moments notice to defend and >protect our nation and its interests. That is the job of the military. It is sad to waste and misuse the military by sending them to unnecessarily occupy another country - that was never a threat or danger to the US. >We are the best equipped and best trained fighting force the world has ever known. >We have the knowledge and the ability to handle whatever situation we are faced >with. It is a tragedy that some of us must die to defend our nation and its interests, >but it is a tragedy we are willing to bear. I admire your derring do. Of course every generation of GI's have said the same in every war they fought - including Viet Nam (at least for the first few years). Sadly I fear if you 'die' you will have died for a bad and useless reason. If you survive, get wounded, or suffer some dibilitating and hidden illness due to untested vaccines and experience the 'loving care' of the VA you will soon curse the day you ever heard of Iraq and George Bush, the glorious defender of the skies over Texas. flw www.ctrl.org DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
