I Once Dreamed of Liberty (Op/Ed)

I was listening to NPR last night and the show was very interesting. There was a Sgt.Maj. speaking about his experiences in Iraq, and his oppinion had me convinced. He said that he's doing his job, and will continue until he's allowed to go home, but since being in the war he's lost most of the patriotism he had going in. He felt that the government sent him and his friends in knowingly under false pretenses (WMD), and whored out their patriotism to serve their needs. He said that soldiers who have been in Iraq rarely want to go back, leaving much of the fighting to gung-ho teenagers still full of the patriotism that he wished he could still have.

I'll find the transcripts of the interview when I have access to a computer.


-


Posted Via ATSmobile (BETA v0.3)


-

I get c2c on podcast. I'll have to find that.

But one, two or even a dozen malcontents do not a revolution make. there are 130K plus there and I know several personally and I hear nothing but good.

Originally posted by semperfortis
I accept your opinion about the military, Yet there have been direct slanders directed at our men and women and as a result I simply ignore the unprovoked and unintelligent remarks and those that make them. My stand is that you can not possibly judge the soldiers unless you have experienced combat yourself. To do so is an insult to any expectation of an intelligent response.

Well I can understand that to some extent, but you must at least admit that there are people that can understand what they must be going through, even though they've never seen combat. Just because I'm not over there fighting doesn't mean that this war is any more or less mine to fight as well. Those men and women of our's putting their lives on the line for the Iraqi's benefit are more important to me than Iraqi sovereignty.

It should also be said that I don't make it a point to judge my troops' actions since I'm not there, and therefore cannot say what actually happened to cause the reaction they gave. They respond based on what they've been taught, and in doing so may do some things which the civilized world may find as abhorant. That doesn't mean that they did the right or wrong thing; it just means that they may have gotten confused in what they were doing. It's a lawless country over there right now, since no one seems able to do anything about those breaking the law.

Until an ample Iraqi force can be created, there isn't much more we can do but to accept what little we've got. I just wish there was one decent reason to be there. There's not right now. On that, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. We could debate the reasons for being there all week, and many threads here already have, without any concrete conclusions. What will it take to make the current administration realize that they have made a drastic mistake in staying over there?

I'm tired of my men and women dying for nothing. I wouldn't put my life on the line for someone that's not willing to do it themselves. I think the Iraqi people should show us that they're capable of handling things themselves before we do any more to help them. They need to show us that they want freedom before we should spend anymore money helping them with it. This paragraph is all just my opinion, and should be subsequently referred to as such. I just feel adamant about my troop's safety over the Iraqi safety, when the Iraqis don't seem to show any interest in helping themselves.

TheBorg

Edit for formatting error.

[edit on 27-5-2006 by TheBorg]

And I feel that they have shown us that they want freedom and appreciate us helping by turning out to vote in percentages OUR country has not heard of in decades.

IMO, we are there to ensure they can still do that.

LOL,,, But you are talking to someone that feels if my country sends/sent me, I go without question. LOL

My greatest pride in life besides being a good cop, is that I was/am a good Marine

turning up to vote is in no way showing they want freedom, not nearly enough. They didnt do anything until we arrived, that shows that they dont want it as much as you think. Our forefathers died over dissent, and stuck with it till we were free. THAT is wanting freedom. Showing up to vote does not by any means compare to the sacrifice our forefathers made for freedom. We took the first step, we may have gotten help after it was underway and the killing was already well under way, but we had them courage to step up. These people did not step up, we just ran in there, then changed the reason to maiing them free.

Originally posted by grimreaper797
turning up to vote is in no way showing they want freedom, not nearly enough. They didnt do anything until we arrived, that shows that they dont want it as much as you think. Our forefathers died over dissent, and stuck with it till we were free. THAT is wanting freedom. Showing up to vote does not by any means compare to the sacrifice our forefathers made for freedom. We took the first step, we may have gotten help after it was underway and the killing was already well under way, but we had them courage to step up. These people did not step up, we just ran in there, then changed the reason to maiing them free.

Agreed. There was no communication saying, "please help us America and Coalition Forces, we want you to destroy our homes, and leave us without anything."

Didn't happen.

Our forefathers fought their battle to win the freedoms that we have today. Theyshould have been the forefathers that their children spoke of decades later to say "we fought for our freedom."

Why are there so many battling us and killing our troops, if they wanted our version of "freedom"? While we provide a "democracy" for them, our president over here thinks he is above to law in some stances because of "powers enacted by congress". Well, I would believe that if congress wasn't so darn bitter about what he's doing. Seems as though, if they enacted him with these powers, they would be applauding him, not angry with him.

Originally posted by semperfortis
And I feel that they have shown us that they want freedom and appreciate us helping by turning out to vote in percentages OUR country has not heard of in decades.

Agreed. We all need to vote more, but that leads us to another topic altogether which has been covered in other threads... If you'd like to debate why I think there is no reason for us to vote right now, then set up a thread and I'll have a go. Just to be clear, I believe voting is an integral part of our citizenship, but I find that who and what we vote for in the current system doesn't matter, since Big Business has control of it all.

IMO, we are there to ensure they can still do that.

LOL,,, But you are talking to someone that feels if my country sends/sent me, I go without question. LOL

My greatest pride in life besides being a good cop, is that I was/am a good Marine

And there's no reason why the Iraqi government couldn't set up a force that does what we've been doing for 3 years. How long did it take the military to train you in the arts of war? That might shed some light on the timeline. I may have misjudged how long it takes for the military to train people to fight.

And I want you to know that I respect all of my soldiers, you included, since you all are our first line of defense. If I was a soldier, I'd want to do my best as well when called, but since I'm not, I can't. I'm actually unable to, since I'm physically incapable of doing so. I would have joined after 9/11 had I been able to. It was something that I was and still am adamant about. Protecting OUR people is more important to me than protecting someone else's. I think that until we can control our own borders, we needn't worry about anyone else's.

And yet again, that's just my opinion. Do with it as you will.

TheBorg

Again very insightful Borg.

An answer to your question is 3 months in Basic, then 3 more in scout sniper school.

But we were not dealing with car bombs and homicide bombers.

I do not completely disagree with you borg, I just feel that as usual we (citizens) do not have the information that is available to those in charge over there. Ours is mere speculation without all of the facts. Having experienced it, I wish all of our people would come home, but I would also rather fight it over there and not have another 9/11.

Yes, the borders are a serious concern. But as you say, another thread.

Can't argue the vote yet, I'll research it and maybe just start that thread.

An absolutely beautiful post.

Somewhere aong the way it seems people have mistaken freedom with the freedom to take away others liberty. We must be ever vigilant against ANY threat to our beloved freedom from foreign and DOMESTIC threats. Often times it is the domestic threat that is far greater than the foreign. For with foreign threats the enemy is laid bare, but with domestic threats they come in much less obvious form.

Did you know that almost 50% of highschool grads DONT know who the Vice President is? How can we expect our citizenry to take an active role in our govt. when they dont even know who the biggest players are? The level of apathy and ignorance in this nation today would make our fore-fathers roll over in thier graves.
To Pass an act such as the PARTIOT act is treasonous to the very core of our Constitution. I ve said this before and I'll say it again. When you compromise your ideals in a war of ideology, as is the WOT, then you have already lost the war! before a single shot fires we have already lost. What good is preserving freedom when there is none left?

It is truly sad but we have gone from "the Land of the Free" to "the Land of Free...Enterprise." Instead of, "land of the free and home of the brave" we have become "land of the thief and home of the slave".

Thomas Jefferson once said "A people that fears the govt., is called tyranny. A govt. that fears its people , Liberty." Never has a need for the Govt to fear its people been greater. We have come to a point where we are one 911 event away from martial law. which is a complete perversion of our rights to exist freely.

hopefully, We the People, can find it within ourselves to summon the strength and courage, to stand up and be counted, regardless of religious, racial, political, economic differences, as a united people. we MUST cast aside our differences for the greater good of ALL. Not only for a select group...aka special interest. We have to dig deep within our souls and realize that we have gone too far. In an honest interest of "protecting" ourselves we have been over zealous and have dealt a major blow to the ADVANCEMENT on all fronts of mankind. Not just americans; but the world. Americans have got to lead the way and be the beacon of freedom...not through word, but through deed.

I too, once dreamed of Liberty! May those dreams make their way back to us all soon.

Originally posted by semperfortis
I do not completely disagree with you borg, I just feel that as usual we (citizens) do not have the information that is available to those in charge over there. Ours is mere speculation without all of the facts. Having experienced it, I wish all of our people would come home, but I would also rather fight it over there and not have another 9/11.

Well don't you think we need to know what's going on over there? Isn't there some sort of right for us to know what it is that over $20B of our own tax dollars a year are going into?

Yes, the borders are a serious concern. But as you say, another thread.

Can't argue the vote yet, I'll research it and maybe just start that thread.

I look forward to said thread. Should I miss it's creation, please U2U me with the link, and I'll pop in for a look. Again, I bid you well.

semper fi,

TheBorg

Now I can rant Borg.

The problem I see with "knowing" what is going on over "there" is the information overload. For people willing to put in the time and energy to obtain the information necessary to actually form an intelligent decision, this is wonderful. However.... Most Americans are not of that ilk. Most sit in front of their TV's watching the BIG 3 and swallowing everything that is blasted at them by their "trusted" and "well known" news anchors. News is "BIG" business as we all know, and that business is fed with tragedy and controversy, not with the good news of the day.

I receive a posting about once a week called the Advisor, This is written by the Armed Forces editorial staff in Baghdad. It spends a major portion of time devoted to the positive aspects of the happenings in Iraq. If I knew how I would post it here for you to read. The stories directly from the fighting men and women are heartwarming and positive.

Do not get me wrong, I am not in anyway saying that the news should be filtered, or censored. Only that a tremendous percentage of people are not informed enough to vote, much lass make a comment on the actions in a war. Yet every single poll uses these same people and these same polls are being used to illustrate satisfaction levels with the war and current administration. I mean come on, anyone with a 3rd grade education can see the correlation between gas prices and the admins satisfaction level. One goes up, the other goes down because most are only concerned with what is happening in their lives not 1000s of miles away. They know all about that anyway, they watch CBS, ABC and NBC. HUH? I have no answers, only observations. There have been far more potentially unpopular actions in both world wars, yet the press was pro government at that time and so the news was as well. The press is anti Bush so all we are going to get is anything and everything negative.

I like knowing what is going on, yes, but I have been there and understand the nuances behind the stories and I at least attempt to garner the truth and not simply sit back and say it is all bad, we have no reason to be there etc. I am however an optimist and usually look for the good anyway. Going to be my downfall yet. LOL

If I have learned nothing as a Law Enforcement Officer it is that people are incredibly self centered and self absorbed. Some kid spray paints a guy's fence and that same man wants me to drop my homicide investigation and find the little skunk that did it. That my friend was an actual example that happened to me in 1997. This is not isolated either, take for instance the democratic screaming point that privatizing the social security and allowing me to invest some of MY money is being "explained" to the seniors as "The Republicans want to take your social security away." It does not matter that it is completely individual, the fear is implanted and the "job" done. No bill. The same thing with the war. Enough media "big wigs" against the war, and all you will see are negatives and an obvious attempt to form the US opinion against the current administration. Of course we still have the "Tragedy sells" motivation. As long as people are fascinated by the screaming points and willing to accept anything the major news puts out as fact, this will never change.

There are hundreds of positive actions happening in Iraq for each single negative, and yet all we see is that one negative.

That my friend is one mans opinion.

semper I can understand why you would feel we should be over there and not allow another 9/11. But if you care about human life, rather then just american life, you will see that many 9/11's have occured for them from us being there. Many of them, had absolutely nothing to do with it but living in the wrong area.

Im not worried about from what country or what religion these people follow, Im worried about if they are being killed for no reason or not. Do you truely believe with all your heart that if we didnt take all that money from the war and use it on security at home, that we wouldnt be able to stop another terrorist attack?

I believe stopping any person from attacking your home. I do not believe in taking pre emptive action to do so. To make a pre emptive action against crime is to take away freedom. Why? Because when we act first against some one we think might do a crime, we take away their freedom of choice. They didnt decide whether or not to carry out a crime, we decided they would and acted on them.

Innocent till proven guilty. Do we really represent that, or is that just something we said was a good idea? We should represent our laws and our beliefs, so why do we judge them as guilty when they have yet to even commit an act against people? Who are we to go around the world to stop people from attacking us, before they even make the decision to? Is that what freedom stands for, making the decision for them rather then letting them make it? If we cant go around the world to represent our countries beliefs, then what the hell are we fighting for...?

Originally posted by Muaddib

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
.......................

How many people do you think would just keep quiet and accept the siege of this country? How many do you think will be the ‘insurgents’ or ‘terrorists’ ruining it for everyone else? I’m sure there will be plenty of news reports then too. All telling you not to fight back.

Well, you see, the thing is that mostly in these forums you won't see almost anything good being reported, now more than ever, either in Iraq, or the United States. Most people around here seem to want to concentrate only on death and destruction, and want to blame the coalition and the United States for it...

But it is a fact that millions or Iraqis have a better way of life now, after the war than ever before.

Bwah, haw, haw.

What, because we destroyed the thin fabric of their economy and ability to provide potable water with our economic sanctions following Desert Storm and then hammered them again in the present debacle and now have restored a fraction of their access to potable water we should applaud ourselves?

Man, you have got to be kidding.




[edit on 28-5-2006 by seattlelaw]

Originally posted by semperfortis
hey Muaddib, maybe he would prefer they lost their freedoms to Saddam when he was gassing them by the hundred of thousands.

What was the VERY conservative estimate again? Over 1 million of his own people exterminated?

Ah but we are the bad guys.

Do these posters have any logic at all?

Common sense appears to have fled this post.

Get your history straight, semperfotis. Your boss, Don Rumsfeld, and your hero, Ronnie Raygun, were directly responsible for making possible the gassing of the Iraqi people you complain of.

This is what bothers me. The supporters of this mishap in the mid-east have such little knowledge of how we got from point 'A' to point 'B' in this quagmire. Ignorance is truly bliss provided you have a warm and well oiled M-16 in your hands.

“Man and the turtle are very much alike. Neither makes any progress without sticking his neck out.”
—Donald Rumsfeld

Five years before Saddam Hussein’s now infamous 1988 gassing of the Kurds, a key meeting took place in Baghdad that would play a significant role in forging close ties between Saddam Hussein and Washington. It happened at a time when Saddam was first alleged to have used chemical weapons. The meeting in late December 1983 paved the way for an official restoration of relations between Iraq and the US, which had been severed since the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.

With the Iran-Iraq war escalating, President Ronald Reagan dispatched his Middle East envoy, a former secretary of defense, to Baghdad with a hand-written letter to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and a message that Washington was willing at any moment to resume diplomatic relations.

That envoy was Donald Rumsfeld.

Rumsfeld’s December 19-20, 1983 visit to Baghdad made him the highest-ranking US official to visit Iraq in 6 years. He met Saddam and the two discussed “topics of mutual interest,” according to the Iraqi Foreign Ministry. “[Saddam] made it clear that Iraq was not interested in making mischief in the world,” Rumsfeld later told The New York Times. “It struck us as useful to have a relationship, given that we were interested in solving the Mideast problems.”

Just 12 days after the meeting, on January 1, 1984, The Washington Post reported that the United States “in a shift in policy, has informed friendly Persian Gulf nations that the defeat of Iraq in the 3-year-old war with Iran would be ‘contrary to U.S. interests’ and has made several moves to prevent that result.”

In March of 1984, with the Iran-Iraq war growing more brutal by the day, Rumsfeld was back in Baghdad for meetings with then-Iraqi Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz. On the day of his visit, March 24th, UPI reported from the United Nations: “Mustard gas laced with a nerve agent has been used on Iranian soldiers in the 43-month Persian Gulf War between Iran and Iraq, a team of U.N. experts has concluded... Meanwhile, in the Iraqi capital of Baghdad, U.S. presidential envoy Donald Rumsfeld held talks with Foreign Minister Tarek Aziz (sic) on the Gulf war before leaving for an unspecified destination.”

The day before, the Iranian news agency alleged that Iraq launched another chemical weapons assault on the southern battlefront, injuring 600 Iranian soldiers. “Chemical weapons in the form of aerial bombs have been used in the areas inspected in Iran by the specialists,” the U.N. report said. “The types of chemical agents used were bis-(2-chlorethyl)-sulfide, also known as mustard gas, and ethyl N, N-dimethylphosphoroamidocyanidate, a nerve agent known as Tabun.”

Prior to the release of the UN report, the US State Department on March 5th had issued a statement saying “available evidence indicates that Iraq has used lethal chemical weapons.”

Commenting on the UN report, US Ambassador Jeane J. Kirkpatrick was quoted by The New York Times as saying, “We think that the use of chemical weapons is a very serious matter. We've made that clear in general and particular.”

Compared with the rhetoric emanating from the current administration, based on speculations about what Saddam might have, Kirkpatrick’s reaction was hardly a call to action.

Most glaring is that Donald Rumsfeld was in Iraq as the 1984 UN report was issued and said nothing about the allegations of chemical weapons use, despite State Department “evidence.” On the contrary, The New York Times reported from Baghdad on March 29, 1984, “American diplomats pronounce themselves satisfied with relations between Iraq and the United States and suggest that normal diplomatic ties have been restored in all but name.”

There's more. In the unlikely event you're interested in the actual history, here it is:
www.commondreams.org...

[edit on 28-5-2006 by seattlelaw]

[edit on 28-5-2006 by seattlelaw]