It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
War: Who Goes; Who Stays
by Douglas Herman
According to a list provided by our Nation’s Oldest Newspaper, a large number of prominent hawks pushing for war with Iraq either dodged the draft at grad school or attained medical deferments while naïve guys like me volunteered to serve. Paul Fussell, author and World War II combat vet, defined these disparities well in his best-selling book, Class. Fussell outlined nine levels of society and classified those who did the dangerous heavy lifting, such as soldiering, as mid to lower level "proles." By contrast, he explained, the rich and super rich who went to the best schools eventually attained unlimited power and made the rules that the rest of us must follow. Thus th ey attained the power to blithely send others out to die without ever stepping on a battlefield themselves or sending their sons there.
When Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, a Princeton alum serving under a Yale alum, recently described Vietnam Era draftees as adding "no value, no advantage" to the war effort I wondered why he so casually dismissed those servicemen who had little power to choose? Nearly ten million military personnel served during the Vietnam Era from 1964-1975, of which 75% of the draftees were from lower-middle or working class families. In Vietnam, amputations or crippling wounds were 300 percent higher than in World War II, yet the majority of Vietnam Era soldiers volunteered, recalling how their fathers had answered the call to arms a quarter century earlier. The Greatest Generation willingly went to war; the Greediest Generation went to Wall Street to make money after grad school. Then having attained power, or "class," they loudly call for the lower classes to do their "Patriotic duty" and rush off to war.
"It is interesting to me that many of those who want to rush this country into war and think it would be so quick and easy don’t know anything about war," said Senator Chuck Hagel, a Vietnam veteran.
"They come at it from an intellectual perspective versus having sat in jungles or foxholes and watched their friends get their heads blown off."
www.strike-the-root.com...
Excerpt from "Why We Didn't Remove Saddam" by George Bush [Sr.] and Brent Scowcroft, Time (2 March 1998):
While we hoped that popular revolt or coup would topple Saddam, neither the U.S. nor the countries of the region wished to see the breakup of the Iraqi state. We were concerned about the long-term balance of power at the head of the Gulf. Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in "mission creep," and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Under those circumstances, furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-cold war world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the U.N.'s mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the U.S. could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different--and perhaps barren--outcome.
www.thememoryhole.org...
Originally posted by EastCoastKid
I don't know why anyone would join under the current circumstances. I believe, unless we pull out, they will most certainly have to begin the draft. There's just no other way around it.
Dear Ken: About That Cakewalk...
by Paul Craig Roberts
The Washington establishment must be wondering today how it was convinced into making such a fatal mistake. Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. Saddam Hussein had no terrorist links or involvement in the September 11 terror attack. U.S. casualties (dead and wounded) now stand at 10 percent of the U.S. invasion force. A few thousand lightly armed insurgents have tied down eight U.S. divisions. Iraq's infrastructure lies in ruins. Fallujah, once a city of 300,000, has been destroyed. The U.S. has lost control of the roads, and most of the U.S. fighting force is confined to protecting supply lines and its own bases. The U.S. military is cracking under the strain of prolonged service in the field. The cost of the war mounts, putting more pressure on a collapsing U.S. dollar. The U.S. occupation has recruited thousands of new terrorists for Osama bin Laden and provided a training ground. Torture and torture memos have destroyed America's moral reputation. Civil war looms as neither Sunnis, Shi'ites, nor Kurds are willing to support a government they do not control. Anti-American feelings throughout the Middle East threaten to undermine the secular puppets that the U.S. keeps afloat in Pakistan, Egypt, and Jordan. There is no light at the end of the tunnel. Generals speak of staying another three, five, seven, and 10 years in order "to get the job done."
www.antiwar.com...
Heading for the Exits
Diplomacy and disengagement: the buzz is "out now"
by Justin Raimondo
The "good news" propaganda is for the red-state masses, but our lawmakers and other insiders know what the real score is. We're getting our asses kicked in Iraq, and there's no polite way to say it. That's why the buzz over "disengagement," i.e., heading for the exits, is getting louder, with a front page treatment in the New York Times informing us that
"Conversation has started bubbling up in Congress, in the Pentagon, and some days even in the White House about when and how American forces might begin to disengage in Iraq."
Members of Congress are returning from their districts, where they've had to listen to rising concerns among their constituents about the costs of this war: the public was never solidly behind it, and since the lies that dragged us into it have been exposed, they are now even less supportive. $5.8 billion per month, skyrocketing casualties, and a military stretched to the breaking point – no wonder it's a Republican congressman, Rep. Howard Coble, dean of North Carolina's congressional delegation – and an enthusiastic supporter of President George W. Bush – who is among the first to raise the issue of exiting Iraq.
www.antiwar.com...
General Says Army Reserve Is Becoming a 'Broken' Force
By Bradley Graham
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, January 6, 2005; Page A01
The head of the Army Reserve has sent a sharply worded memo to other military leaders expressing "deepening concern" about the continued readiness of his troops, who have been used heavily in Iraq and Afghanistan, and warning that his branch of 200,000 soldiers "is rapidly degenerating into a 'broken' force."
In the memo, dated Dec. 20, Lt. Gen. James R. "Ron" Helmly lashed out at what he said were outdated and "dysfunctional" policies on mobilizing and managing the force. He complained that his repeated requests to adjust the policies to current realities have been rebuffed by Pentagon authorities.
The three-star general, who has a reputation for speaking bluntly, said the situation has reached a point at which the Army Reserve is "in grave danger of being unable to meet" its operational requirements if other national emergencies arise.
www.washingtonpost.com...
Originally posted by KrazyJethro
Hold the elections and get the hell out George. There is no winning this war any time soon.
Originally posted by KrazyJethro
-We have little to no need to look outside our country.
-We need no overseas bases.
-We need domestic reform or we will fail
-We need to get off the oil
to name a few.
Originally posted by KrazyJethro
The Libertarians are like the Marine Corps, keep it simple stupid, and handle problems at the lowest level possible.
Originally posted by EastCoastKid
Today a great many Republicans don't have a clue what the GOP has long stood for. They have been deceived terribly by the warmongering, big government, big spending Neo Cons and their paid shills in the tv and print media.