Military opinions and war experience

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

That is the biggest lie in all of history. The "anti-war" movement is anti-American and has been at least since the war in Vietnam. Anyone who believes that is seriously deluded.

Hmmm. I dont feel that way Grady. I am agianst the war, but I am definately NOT anti-American. This nation was founded on individual beliefs that the government does not have absolute controle. We appear to be going the opposite direction we were intended to go. I am not a supporter of the Bush administration, but that does not mean I dont believe in Democracy. Quite the opposite. If not for Democracy, I might not be permitted to have the view I do. I embrace Democracy in its truest form. I just feel that Bush has somehow perverted our Democracy.

[edit on 5/28/05 by Kidfinger]

Originally posted by Kidfinger
I just feel that Bush has somehow perverted our Democracy.

I do believe you mean, SUBVERTED..

To call a fellow citizen, who happens to disagree with you, a traitor, or anti-American is the lowest form of discourse. Especially in AMERICA.

Agree to disagree and leave at that. The one thing being here at ATS should teach everyone, is that even tho many of us disagree vehemently on certain issues, there are other areas those same folks would completely agree on.

So even veterans are anti-american?
VVAW

Originally posted by cmdrpaddy
So even veterans are anti-american?
VVAW

Isn't that an oxymoron?

Isn't that an oxymoron?

It sure is. Thats the irony, veterans who fought for their country who are now of the opinion that the wars they fought in were unjustified or unnecessary, are considered anti-american by some because they are anti-war.

Its a very big problem in many countries, the distortion of issues into plain black and white terms, with no possibility of a middle ground. Its very worrying.

Originally posted by cmdrpaddy

Isn't that an oxymoron?

It sure is. Thats the irony, veterans who fought for their country who are now of the opinion that the wars they fought in were unjustified or unnecessary, are considered anti-american by some because they are anti-war.

Its a very big problem in many countries, the distortion of issues into plain black and white terms, with no possibility of a middle ground. Its very worrying.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is the point of this whole thread. So a person who fought for their country is somehow anti-nation because they believe a subsequent war is unjustified.

Quite simply the most retarded premise yet.

We have heard from a few of our servicemen and veterans now. But I'd like to hear from more of you on this topic. Please, if you have served in the Armed forces, give us s little insight on why you do/dont support the war in Iraq. This has been a very intresting character study of both sides so far and I think we are gleening some excellent info from all the experiences that have been discussed here. Lets keep em coming and try to learn some more about our fellow ATS'rs

heres my 2 pennies...in the begining i was for all this..i watched powell at the un...heard thier evidence and now it has all shown to be false...... or the u.s. intelligence agencies are the most inept organizations around. saddam was a bad man but was he a threat to the u.s? AMERIKA doesn't run around the world helping any country, just countries with natural resources that we would like to have influence over. i can't believe as Americians, we have just sat by and watched each lie unfold...and have continued to sitt there like some kind of drunk in an alcohol induced stupor.

i am former military and currently in the Nat'l Gaurd. ( surprise, surprise)nobody talks about thier oppinions about iraq unless they are pro iraq opinions. it is almost like an unwritten rule that we avoid the iraq question while at drills... it is weird. most people i've talked to are in the Gaurds for, 1) $$ for school
2) training for a civialin job down the road
3) enlistment bonuses
4) padding the resume
5) want to make a carrer of the Natl G'rd but don't want to be in the reg army.
not once has anybody said anything about patriotisim for the country or 'i wanted to help iraq'
soldiers don't want to make it seem like they would not help their comrades in arms...if you voice a different opinion on this subject, that means that you might not be a good 'battle buddy', you might not do your job. i have no combat experience but that looks like it probably will change in 2006..so we have been told. this will be the 2nd deployment for alot. they are just stowikly going on. most don't want to go but, it is part of the Natl G'rd package and just accept it. i think that some think that by voicing a different opinion that thier school $$, job, ect might be injepordy. now think about this........if you had a co-worker that was against the 'business' that you worked for..how could you work with that person?? how would that person be treated by others at the job? generaly you can't give the military a 2 week notice to vacate your job.

the military trains to fight....now there is fighting and all the fighters want to see if they are as good as they think they are ( so-to-speak) and the iraq war is not a war of fighting on a large scale so only a certain percentage 'get' to actually fight...the rest are just moving targets for car bombs. if the war was more large scale combat.. i bet you would see a different reaction from those so hung-ho to see combat. we are in a day and age where alot of youngsters think that they already have combat experience because they play such hi-tech video games.....ah, the ignorence of the young.
so the bravado from the military for the war..is natural for they know nothing more...........................

clearmind, good write up.

This isnt exactly on topic...just my observation.
I think alot of what you said shows the differences between
Guardsmen (weekend warriors) and active duty. It's no secret,
traditional guardsmen have other carreer priorities in thier life, school,
civilian job...whatever. And all that's good, the Guard and reserves do alot in Iraq and stateside. Disaster relief just to name one example.
And many guardsmen are former Active Duty....so they know both worlds.

This is why many of them may feel different about Iraq than those on AD.
Hmm, I don't wanna say they have more to lose cause they don't, but carreer wise, they do...something like that.

I would expect for many of guardsmen to be more like a "college student" (especially the ones that are in college, many of them) than a soldier or Marine. Why? Because they spend 1 weekend a month, 2 weeks a year in the bush and AD people spend everyday in the bush...see my point
Nothing wrong with them, Many of my good friends are guardsmen (they get mad when I call them Tampons, get it).....

And active duty people have the military as thier life until they decide to get out. Some branches are more involved than others and become more of a lifestyle than others aswell.

[edit on 29/5/2005 by SportyMB]

I would like to point out that a good portion of the Guard is also ex-active so they have been there.

The Guard is playing an extremely important role in this conflict and as far as I am concerned when they are called in Theatre, they are just as active as the next guy.

The way our DoD is set up, the NG and Reserves are absolutely CRITICAL to National Defense.


Now I will again try to address something,


earlier a few have posted their extreme displeasure with being called anti-American because they do not support the war. Well I can understand the feelings but not the argument.


Here is why

Fact:

Our Nation is at War, whether one agrees with the reason or not, is irrelevant to the troops putting their life on the line.

Fact:

Moral is EXTREMELY important, and even Kidfinger said how important it was to know those back home support you.


Now, how do you think these soldiers feel when the see in the press that Bush is such a murderer and lier and cheat, and yet these same folks say "Well I am for the troops but not the job they are doing", yet he is their boss? It build doubt and doubt gets you killed on the battlefield.

Fact:

The 2 can not co-exist....


Now - looking at it from that point of view, you maybe can understand the comments. If one is doing something detrimental to the welfare of their combat troops, how can one deem that pro-American?


So can the antiwar folks please explain to me how they are helping the morale of the troops?

Kidfinger I would like to use you as an example, when you were in country, waiting for the damn SCUD alarms all the time, and watching any News you could and you saw the reactions in the press like you see today, how would you have taken it?

Would you then have had a different feeling for your CiC?


Just some points to ponder and I look forward to the answers.

Originally posted by edsinger

Kidfinger I would like to use you as an example, when you were in country, waiting for the damn SCUD alarms all the time, and watching any News you could and you saw the reactions in the press like you see today, how would you have taken it?

Would you then have had a different feeling for your CiC?


Just some points to ponder and I look forward to the answers.

Hmm. You make some valid points Ed. I do agree that the troops hearing the negatives from back home are more apt to have a lower moral. But honestly, when I was serving, the thing that got my moral up was letters from friends and family. See, I joined to fight for them. I do respect and have a general love for all Americans, but I do not know them all. I fought for the ones I knew. My family and friends are who in my mind I was serving. Thier support and love is what kept me clear headed and ready to do what must be done. The news from back home had more of an effect on the troops who didnt have anyone for a support system for those guys, I got some of my friends and family to write to them at least once a month.

I think that how the news from home affects a soldier depends mostly on his state of mind. Granted, during war time, 'state of mind' is something that is hard to describe, but I think maybe I was better equipped mentally to handel this aspect of my job. It was everything else I experienced that I was too young for.

I still dont think that being agianst this war makes me Anti-American. I cannot support something that I truly do not believe in. I cannot stand up and lie to the very men and women that lay their lives on the line every day in Iraq. Personelly I feel if I lied to them about how I felt, I would be doing a greater disservice to them.

[edit on 5/29/05 by Kidfinger]

Originally posted by cmdrpaddy

Isn't that an oxymoron?

It sure is. Thats the irony, veterans who fought for their country who are now of the opinion that the wars they fought in were unjustified or unnecessary, are considered anti-american by some because they are anti-war.

Those who support this war (and others) who have never served should greatly consider the opinions of those who have and oppose them. None of them that I have known are anti-war. I can't speak for my fellow vets, but I can say that after serving, I came out and home with a much deeper love for my country and concern for my fellow servicemen/women. Because of that, my main purpose is to do everything I can to ensure they are used as wisely as possible. My problem with this administration, and with Clinton's, is that our troops have been thrown into the shredder for political reasons. Reasons that don't and didn't pass the smell test. Having said that, everyone's opinion matters, and should be weighed, whether they were in uniform or not.

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
I can't speak for my fellow vets, but I can say that after serving, I came out and home with a much deeper love for my country and concern for my fellow servicemen/women. Because of that, my main purpose is to do everything I can to ensure they are used as wisely as possible.

My problem with this administration, and with Clinton's, is that our troops have been thrown into the shredder for political reasons. Reasons that don't and didn't pass the smell test.

*GULP!*

I can't believe I'm going to admit this, but this is one think I will agree with from u guys about Clinton. BUT, he isnt the first to have made this mistake. And he apparently wasnt the last.

what defines a country or nation...it's people or its govt?? is one a true reflection of the other? more importantly...is the current u.s. govt a true reflection of what the 'people' want? or doesn't it matter,... the govt is always right depsite what the 'people' may or may not want?

in fighting there is no room for doubts.. that is why alot of current/active military personel keep quiet or sound pro-warish. but what they hear should make them pause and ask the question...why do so many oppose what is happening? if this was actually a 'just cause' why are there so many against it? does it hurt moral? yes... The troops are basically in a position where they must do what is asked or face legal consequences. i geuss in a way they are sorta trapped......as they raise the percentage of Natl G to reg army, you will hear more ‘anti-war’ stuff.
Does it hurt moral? Yes...is it a time when it should?....a lot of what is happening in America seems to be tied to terrorist this, terrorist that, everything is related to terrorism now...I guess that justifies everything ?? ...hay.....I just ask a lot of questions...........

Anti-war does not mean anti-american ......the govt lied or ‘streched’ the ‘truth’ a lot..and things are not changing for the better..........................

I'd like to speak a little on those serving in Guard and Reserves. Back when I was in, in training, the Guard and Reserves were not well thought of. They were the red-headed stepchildren. Every line, they were made to go to the back of it. Regular Army always went first. We laughed at them and talked down to them in our Army way. And they just shrugged it off, smiling, 'cos they knew after training, they got to go back to the block. We were in it for the long slog.

One of my best best buddies in AIT & boot camp went home after training, missed the life, and went regular.

These days, I believe the Guard and Reserves are being used wrongly. And I really feel for them and their families. None of them signed up for this. They are bearing much of the brunt of this conflict, which is a huge change. I lay that at the feet of Rumsfeld and his wrong-headed policies (far too few troops for the invasion and ensuing occupation AND throwing out the Tipfid - the bible of warfare planning.) Remember, they scoffed at those who planners who actually had experience fighting in the mideast (and Vietnam). I'm getting off track, but bear with me. The reason the Gulf War went off so brilliantly was b/c of Powell's plan (and perfect execution from the TipFid.)

The National Guard, in particular, was never meant to fight in a foreign war. They are for the protection and help for their respective states in emergencies. Unlike the Guard, the Reserves are there to suppliment their regular counterparts. But in targeted areas. Not whole units to be used as active duty. They have overspent, again, b/c of the idiotic policy they employed. By men, I must point out, that have NO military experience whatsoever. It is unjust, to say the least.

One thing that burns me up beyond all is the fact that our men and women are being forced to do upwards now of THREE tours! Not even in Vietnam were our regular forces MADE to do more than one. ONE is enough for ANYONE. Two and three should be left soley up to the individual soldier, Marine, Sailor and Airman.

And in Vietnam, Johnson never sent our Guard over there, and to my knowledge, very small numbers, if any Reserve troops. (Unless they volunteered - which many brave souls did.)

This policy violates our military and is crushing our Army and Marines. Just look at recruitment numbers. They are falling farther and farther away from their goals. Faith in this operation and support for it is dying. This administration has got a major problem on its hands in that way. Before long, especially if they go pull something in Iran, a draft WILL have to be instated. To not acknowledge that reality, to me, is derelict.

My bro's unit..

My younger brother, having been inspired by my service, joined the National Guard in 2000. He's almost done with his first enlistment. It's interesting to hear him talk about his unit and how his fellow soldiers felt about the invasion and today's occupation. Many of them have answered the call to join our forces over there and have come home to tell the tale. He said the majority of them supported the president and his decision to invade; however, NOW, the majority of them STRONGLY oppose it. B/c now they feel they were lied to and it was all unjustified. My brother now is against it and doesn't want any part of it. And man, he's a soldier's soldier. Better than I was. I'm proud of that boy. (He should be a drill sgt. ) Anyway, all he wants now is for our troops to come home so he can get on with raising his two baby girls and enjoy a good life with his girl. For me, there is no greater wish than that. It would KILL me if he had to go and something happened to him. Hell, I've said it before, I would petition every authority under God for them to take me ('cos I'm single) instead of him. Yes, I would go back in and go over there if it meant he could stay here with his family. No matter how much I oppose it.

Originally posted by Kidfinger
I can't believe I'm going to admit this, but this is one think I will agree with from u guys about Clinton. BUT, he isnt the first to have made this mistake. And he apparently wasnt the last.

You're right on that, Kid. Take Reagan. He let the Neo Cons (back in his first term) con him into sending our Marines into Beirut. They got blown to hell and he said, "WHOA! WAit a damn minute, guys.. why are we really there? We have no dog in this fight." So, he told them to get outta his face and he pulled those Marines out. WISELY. I guess that was the Gip's Somalia. The difference is, with him, he learned and adjusted course. That never happened again on his watch. And a lot of hard-core politicos never forgive him for it. He didn't give a shyte, though. They were nothing to him and he had plans. (Bringing about the end of the Soviet empire.)

The bottom line is this, every president has to make decisions that would repel his own base, and would curl the toe nails of most civilians. That's a part of the job. It's the faustian bargain. Some use their powers much more wisely than others do, though. In Bush Jr.'s case, I think he has been so manipulated its scary. I think he truly beleives what he's doing is good for the country, but I also think they lie to him and massage his ego to no end.

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
I think he truly beleives what he's doing is good for the country, but I also think they lie to him and massage his ego to no end.

Ya know.... I have often wondered if he even knows what alot of us think. What I mean is, does any one tell him about the people who dont want to be there or is he just told the sunny side of things more often than not?

I apologize for taking this abit off topic. I just had that thought when i read that last part.

Originally posted by Kidfinger
I have often wondered if he even knows what alot of us think.

I voted for him in 2000 because he was speakin' my language. And I truly did like the guy, as much as I could possibly have not knowing him personally. And you know, I always held his father in great respect b/c of his handling of the Gulf War. But... as the years passed, and I saw the strong emergence of these Neo Cons (who were once LIBERALS who got ran outta the Dem. party for being sociopaths), I started to see things much more clearly. Then came the campaign season. Bush Jr. is truly the boy in the bubble if there ever was such a thing. He only speaks to pre-approved crowds, for example. It's not a leap to suppose his circle of advisors tells him only what they want him to think and know. By his admission, he is not interested in delving into research. He claimed not even to read the papers. That ought to cause everyone pause. I want a president who thinks for himself, based on his own knowledge and experience. I don't want some affable puppet. That's the difference between Reagan and BUsh Jr. as I see it. Reagan was always accused of being an empty suit. He was anything but. Bushy on the other hand, is just that. And I don't mean any disrespect. That is simply what I see and what I know based on what others have told me having known him back in Texas. The media isn't gonna tell us about this, but there are ALOT of very concerned conservative Republicans out there who are desperately trying to right this ship of state - from the hijacking of the NeoCon movement. They are our nation's greatest enemy.

Originally posted by edsinger

Now, how do you think these soldiers feel when the see in the press that Bush is such a murderer and lier and cheat, and yet these same folks say "Well I am for the troops but not the job they are doing", yet he is their boss?

They (I was once a 'they' over there) would feel great that someone gives a crap! That someone would fight for them, while they are fighting for the government.

Want to lower morale? Just keep on supporting this bogus invasion and occupation. Show the troops that you don't give a crap about them by not caring about the lies and missteps that lead them into harm's way.

I agree with Curme on this. At some point every soldier in combat has to face certain realizations. They either face it down, or they suppress it.

I'll never forget a moment I had over there, freezing out in bumfu**Iraq. I had never been one to value my studies. I thought the world, meaning success, would be handed to me on a silver platter. Because everything had always gone my way. (I think that 's why they say 'youth is wasted on the young. )

Call it an epiphany. I was sitting there, at the crack of dawn, just off guard duty, trying to warm my frozen feet by the flame of our kerosene heater. And I thought to myself: Self: I don't wanna be a peon anymore. Someone's patsy. When, and if, God willing, I make it back to the world, I will dedicate my life to seeking knowledge and writing about truth, whatever those truths may be. And I have. That was the smartes decision I ever made for myself.

Instead of waiting, I took that bull by the horns, and set out on my educational journey from the moment I got back. Being stationed at Ft. Campbell for my last year after the war, I took part-time classes (after work) through Austin Peay State University and made grades like a MOFO. I got out and went into college with a high B average. Something that would have ASTOUNDED my teachers in high school. It changed everything for me.