Saturday, February 25, 2006
Can you guess who this is?
You have to search through our media to see this story but the truth is out there.
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
Respect for our Fallen Heroes!
This is from an e:mail from a friend.
I need to express a few thoughts before you all check out these sites. Cpl Peter Wagler is from my home town of Hutchinson Kansas. I did not know him but I am humbled by his sacrifice. As I am looking at the pics I noticed a picture labeled 05.the battlefront1.jpg and I noticed the bastards with the hate signs protesting the funeral and I could not help myself from crying.
Maybe it is because I spent time flying a lot of these young men and women out of Balad and feel a strong bond with them. Apparently there is this “pastor” that travels around the country protesting at the funerals of our heroes.
Now, the part of this I also want y’all to see is the web page for the patriot guard. These guys ride around the nation and place themselves between the families of our fallen heroes. I would like y’all to check out both links and then it is up to you. I am throwing full support behind the patriot guard. (just wish I had a bike to ride with them). Thanks for your time to read this.
Scott
Ps I wanted to say thanks to Bonnie our Texas State Captain for the Patriot Riders.
Attached are links to the Patriot Guard and the funeral in Hutchinson
honoring Cpl. Peter Wagler.
Great photos showing a great hero and wonderful organization.
http://www.patriotguard.org/
http://test.patriotguard.org/photos/listpics.asp?dir=Cpl++Peter+Wagler++Hutchinson++Kansas
I need to express a few thoughts before you all check out these sites. Cpl Peter Wagler is from my home town of Hutchinson Kansas. I did not know him but I am humbled by his sacrifice. As I am looking at the pics I noticed a picture labeled 05.the battlefront1.jpg and I noticed the bastards with the hate signs protesting the funeral and I could not help myself from crying.
Maybe it is because I spent time flying a lot of these young men and women out of Balad and feel a strong bond with them. Apparently there is this “pastor” that travels around the country protesting at the funerals of our heroes.
Now, the part of this I also want y’all to see is the web page for the patriot guard. These guys ride around the nation and place themselves between the families of our fallen heroes. I would like y’all to check out both links and then it is up to you. I am throwing full support behind the patriot guard. (just wish I had a bike to ride with them). Thanks for your time to read this.
Scott
Ps I wanted to say thanks to Bonnie our Texas State Captain for the Patriot Riders.
Attached are links to the Patriot Guard and the funeral in Hutchinson
honoring Cpl. Peter Wagler.
Great photos showing a great hero and wonderful organization.
http://www.patriotguard.org/
http://test.patriotguard.org/photos/listpics.asp?dir=Cpl++Peter+Wagler++Hutchinson++Kansas
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
Again, let's understand who our enemy is.
OUTRAGED MUSLIMS! OH MY!**We wake up this morning to see video on CNN showing rampaging Muslims around the world <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4676930.stm>. In Europe, the Middle East, the Pacific Rim ...
Muslim Mobs spreading mayhem. It seems that these mighty mad Muslims are rioting and firing their ever-present AK-47s into the air because of cartoons. Yup ... this latest epidemic of Muslim outrage comes to us because some newspapers in Norway and Denmark published some cartoons depicting Mohammed.Muslim outrage huh. OK . let's do a little historical review.
* Muslim officials block the exit where school girls are trying to escape a burning building because their faces were exposed.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims cut off the heads of three teenaged girls on their way to school in Indonesia. A Christian school.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder teachers trying to teach Muslim children in Iraq.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder over 80 tourists with car bombs outside cafes and hotels in Egypt.
No Muslim outrage.
* A Muslim attacks a missionary children's school in India. Kills six.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims slaughter hundreds of children and teachers in Beslan, Russia. Muslims shoot children in the back.
No Muslim outrage.
* Let's go way back. Muslims kidnap and kill athletes at the Munich Summer Olympics.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims fire rocket-propelled grenades into schools full of children in Israel.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder more than 50 commuters in attacks on London subways and busses. Over 700 are injured.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims massacre dozens of innocents at a Passover Seder.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder innocent vacationers in Bali.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslim newspapers publish anti-Semitic cartoons.
No Muslim outrage
* Muslims are involved, on one side or the other, in almost every one of the 125+ shooting wars around the world.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims beat the charred bodies of Western civilians with their shoes, then hang them from a bridge.
No Muslim outrage.
* Newspapers in Denmark and Norway publish cartoons depicting Mohammed.
Muslims are outraged.Dead children. Dead tourists. Dead teachers. Dead doctors and nurses. Death, destruction and mayhem around the world at the hands of Muslims .. no Muslim outrage ... but publish a cartoon depicting Mohammed with a bomb in his turban and all hell breaks loose.Come on, is this really about cartoons? They're rampaging and burning flags. They're looking for Europeans to kidnap. They're threatening innkeepers and generally raising holy Muslim hell not because of any outrage over a cartoon. They're outraged because it is part of the Islamic jihadist culture to be outraged. They don't really need a reason. They just need an excuse. Actually they don't even need an excuse - Wandering around, destroying property, murdering children, firing guns into the a crowd, blowing up women and children is a sure entry to paradise.
Muslim Mobs spreading mayhem. It seems that these mighty mad Muslims are rioting and firing their ever-present AK-47s into the air because of cartoons. Yup ... this latest epidemic of Muslim outrage comes to us because some newspapers in Norway and Denmark published some cartoons depicting Mohammed.Muslim outrage huh. OK . let's do a little historical review.
* Muslim officials block the exit where school girls are trying to escape a burning building because their faces were exposed.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims cut off the heads of three teenaged girls on their way to school in Indonesia. A Christian school.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder teachers trying to teach Muslim children in Iraq.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder over 80 tourists with car bombs outside cafes and hotels in Egypt.
No Muslim outrage.
* A Muslim attacks a missionary children's school in India. Kills six.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims slaughter hundreds of children and teachers in Beslan, Russia. Muslims shoot children in the back.
No Muslim outrage.
* Let's go way back. Muslims kidnap and kill athletes at the Munich Summer Olympics.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims fire rocket-propelled grenades into schools full of children in Israel.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder more than 50 commuters in attacks on London subways and busses. Over 700 are injured.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims massacre dozens of innocents at a Passover Seder.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder innocent vacationers in Bali.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslim newspapers publish anti-Semitic cartoons.
No Muslim outrage
* Muslims are involved, on one side or the other, in almost every one of the 125+ shooting wars around the world.
No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims beat the charred bodies of Western civilians with their shoes, then hang them from a bridge.
No Muslim outrage.
* Newspapers in Denmark and Norway publish cartoons depicting Mohammed.
Muslims are outraged.Dead children. Dead tourists. Dead teachers. Dead doctors and nurses. Death, destruction and mayhem around the world at the hands of Muslims .. no Muslim outrage ... but publish a cartoon depicting Mohammed with a bomb in his turban and all hell breaks loose.Come on, is this really about cartoons? They're rampaging and burning flags. They're looking for Europeans to kidnap. They're threatening innkeepers and generally raising holy Muslim hell not because of any outrage over a cartoon. They're outraged because it is part of the Islamic jihadist culture to be outraged. They don't really need a reason. They just need an excuse. Actually they don't even need an excuse - Wandering around, destroying property, murdering children, firing guns into the a crowd, blowing up women and children is a sure entry to paradise.
Saturday, February 04, 2006
Our Military Men and Women Deserve our Utmost Respect
A Different Operation For U.S. Doctors In Iraq
Severe Cases, Grueling Hours Are Norm
By Thomas E. Ricks, Washington Post Staff Writer
BALAD, Iraq, Jan. 31 -- Maj. Hans Bakken and Maj. Brett Schlifka were bone-tired as they sipped bad coffee from foam cups on a chilly morning in a U.S. military tent. The men, both neurosurgeons, had worked on two serious head wound cases the previous evening and then, after going to sleep about midnight, were awakened at 1:30 a.m. to treat a soldier flown in with a gunshot to the head.
The night before that, Sunday, they operated on ABC News anchorman Bob Woodruff and his cameraman, Doug Vogt.
"They all get the same quality of medical care -- a soldier, an Iraqi, a journalist," said Schlifka, a big-armed man from Philadelphia.
They didn't want to discuss specifics about Woodruff and Vogt. "We can't give you any details" for privacy reasons, said Bakken, a native of Decorah, Iowa.
But they did talk plenty about who they are and what they do in this, the Air Force Theater Hospital, which recently was designated as the medical receiving center in Iraq for the handling of all head and neck wounds by the U.S. military. The wounded ABC journalists were flown here by helicopter from Baghdad. They were eventually taken to the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, where a doctor said their prognosis was "excellent," according to news reports.
Back home, Bakken said he saw "maybe half a dozen" gunshot head wounds in six years of practice. Here, about 70 miles north of Baghdad, he handles one or two "penetrating brain injuries" a day, either from gunfire or roadside bombs.
The two neurosurgeons also have become experts in particular varieties of head trauma. The majority of head injuries they saw in the United States involved external trauma, but most of their cases here involve penetration of the brain. What's more, the pistol shots they generally saw in the United States were far less lethal than higher-velocity rifle shots that traverse the skull and are nearly impossible to survive, they said. Also, their patients here arrive with far more complex wounds than the typical victim back home. Bomb victims arrive with eardrums blown, cheekbones smashed, eyes ripped apart, as well as deep brain injuries.
The extraordinary becomes routine. "I would say without exception almost everyone who has a penetrating injury has a craniectomy," said Bakken, referring to the operation in which part of the skull is removed to relieve swelling of the brain. Other military officials here have indicated that such a procedure was performed on Woodruff, who along with Vogt was injured on Sunday in a roadside bombing near Baghdad that caught them standing in the open hatch of an Iraqi army armored vehicle.
Understanding the effects of roadside bombs -- what the Army calls IEDs, or improvised explosive devices -- is an art in itself. "The shrapnel pieces from an IED seem to do more damage than a bullet," Schlifka said. The velocity of the fragments varies much more than do the velocity of bullets, and the greater the velocity, the worse injury to the brain, he said.
Working with another Army doctor, Maj. Gerald Grant, Schlifka and Bakken are still learning about blast effects -- the unseen damage caused by pressure on the brain, in which some people appear unhurt by a bomb attack only to suffer headaches, disorientation or lapses in short-term memory later on. "We see a lot of guys that are in a Humvee. They get knocked out but they, quote, don't sustain any serious injuries, unquote," Bakken said. Then when that soldier gets back to his unit, he doesn't feel quite right, but his problems are hard to discern except by those who already know him.
But the doctors have also learned to limit their intervention. They said they don't necessarily try to extract every piece of shrapnel from a head wound, because digging deep can occasionally do more harm to the brain than good.
The men are clearly proud of the quality of the care they provide, working in tents connected by a plywood corridor while Army UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters are landing just a few feet away. "I think we provide Level 1 trauma care comparable to any center in the United States," Bakken said.
He said he also likes the clarity of purpose involved in his work, with little time for administrative work or patience for bureaucratic obstacles. Bakken and Schlifka are Army officers, but said they are working in an Air Force facility with almost no friction or rivalry. "This is kind of a rank-free environment, and almost a service-free environment," Bakken said.
Bakken appeared to have little interest in discussing his brush with celebrity for having treated Woodruff and Vogt. He joined the Army last year at age 37 specifically to serve in Iraq, abandoning his private practice in Tacoma, Wash., and obviously taking a huge cut in pay.
He has no complaints. "They're paying me plenty," he said. "I'm a single guy." He and Schlifka are uncomfortable with being cast in any special light. Every night they see soldiers who they say made far greater sacrifices.
"I'm just another 61 Zulu," said Bakken, using the military classification for a neurosurgeon. (The infantrymen on which he operates, by contrast, are "11 Bravos.") "Just an asset. There are no prima donnas here."
Severe Cases, Grueling Hours Are Norm
By Thomas E. Ricks, Washington Post Staff Writer
BALAD, Iraq, Jan. 31 -- Maj. Hans Bakken and Maj. Brett Schlifka were bone-tired as they sipped bad coffee from foam cups on a chilly morning in a U.S. military tent. The men, both neurosurgeons, had worked on two serious head wound cases the previous evening and then, after going to sleep about midnight, were awakened at 1:30 a.m. to treat a soldier flown in with a gunshot to the head.
The night before that, Sunday, they operated on ABC News anchorman Bob Woodruff and his cameraman, Doug Vogt.
"They all get the same quality of medical care -- a soldier, an Iraqi, a journalist," said Schlifka, a big-armed man from Philadelphia.
They didn't want to discuss specifics about Woodruff and Vogt. "We can't give you any details" for privacy reasons, said Bakken, a native of Decorah, Iowa.
But they did talk plenty about who they are and what they do in this, the Air Force Theater Hospital, which recently was designated as the medical receiving center in Iraq for the handling of all head and neck wounds by the U.S. military. The wounded ABC journalists were flown here by helicopter from Baghdad. They were eventually taken to the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, where a doctor said their prognosis was "excellent," according to news reports.
Back home, Bakken said he saw "maybe half a dozen" gunshot head wounds in six years of practice. Here, about 70 miles north of Baghdad, he handles one or two "penetrating brain injuries" a day, either from gunfire or roadside bombs.
The two neurosurgeons also have become experts in particular varieties of head trauma. The majority of head injuries they saw in the United States involved external trauma, but most of their cases here involve penetration of the brain. What's more, the pistol shots they generally saw in the United States were far less lethal than higher-velocity rifle shots that traverse the skull and are nearly impossible to survive, they said. Also, their patients here arrive with far more complex wounds than the typical victim back home. Bomb victims arrive with eardrums blown, cheekbones smashed, eyes ripped apart, as well as deep brain injuries.
The extraordinary becomes routine. "I would say without exception almost everyone who has a penetrating injury has a craniectomy," said Bakken, referring to the operation in which part of the skull is removed to relieve swelling of the brain. Other military officials here have indicated that such a procedure was performed on Woodruff, who along with Vogt was injured on Sunday in a roadside bombing near Baghdad that caught them standing in the open hatch of an Iraqi army armored vehicle.
Understanding the effects of roadside bombs -- what the Army calls IEDs, or improvised explosive devices -- is an art in itself. "The shrapnel pieces from an IED seem to do more damage than a bullet," Schlifka said. The velocity of the fragments varies much more than do the velocity of bullets, and the greater the velocity, the worse injury to the brain, he said.
Working with another Army doctor, Maj. Gerald Grant, Schlifka and Bakken are still learning about blast effects -- the unseen damage caused by pressure on the brain, in which some people appear unhurt by a bomb attack only to suffer headaches, disorientation or lapses in short-term memory later on. "We see a lot of guys that are in a Humvee. They get knocked out but they, quote, don't sustain any serious injuries, unquote," Bakken said. Then when that soldier gets back to his unit, he doesn't feel quite right, but his problems are hard to discern except by those who already know him.
But the doctors have also learned to limit their intervention. They said they don't necessarily try to extract every piece of shrapnel from a head wound, because digging deep can occasionally do more harm to the brain than good.
The men are clearly proud of the quality of the care they provide, working in tents connected by a plywood corridor while Army UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters are landing just a few feet away. "I think we provide Level 1 trauma care comparable to any center in the United States," Bakken said.
He said he also likes the clarity of purpose involved in his work, with little time for administrative work or patience for bureaucratic obstacles. Bakken and Schlifka are Army officers, but said they are working in an Air Force facility with almost no friction or rivalry. "This is kind of a rank-free environment, and almost a service-free environment," Bakken said.
Bakken appeared to have little interest in discussing his brush with celebrity for having treated Woodruff and Vogt. He joined the Army last year at age 37 specifically to serve in Iraq, abandoning his private practice in Tacoma, Wash., and obviously taking a huge cut in pay.
He has no complaints. "They're paying me plenty," he said. "I'm a single guy." He and Schlifka are uncomfortable with being cast in any special light. Every night they see soldiers who they say made far greater sacrifices.
"I'm just another 61 Zulu," said Bakken, using the military classification for a neurosurgeon. (The infantrymen on which he operates, by contrast, are "11 Bravos.") "Just an asset. There are no prima donnas here."
Saturday, January 21, 2006
Thursday, January 12, 2006
We need to support these guys!
The Marine Corps Gunnery Sergeant in the picture below is Michael Burghard, part of the Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Team that is supporting 2nd Brigade 28th Infantry Division (Pennsylvania Army National Guard).
I heard the below story first hand last Saturday during a video teleconference between his Brigade Commander and the 28th Infantry Division Commander. I thought that others should hear it as well, as I think it demonstrates the true spirit of most of our troops on the ground (from my experience).
Leading the fight is Gunnery Sgt Michael Burghardt, known as "Iron Mike" or just "Gunny". He is on his third tour in Iraq. He had become a legend in the bomb disposal world after winning the Bronze Star for disabling 64 IEDs and destroying 1,548 pieces of ordnance during his second tour. Then, on September 19, he got blown up.
He had arrived at a chaotic scene after a bomb had killed four US soldiers. He chose not to wear the bulky bomb protection suit. "You can't react to any sniper fire and you get tunnel-vision," he explains. So, protected by just a helmet and standard-issue flak jacket, he began what bomb disposal officers term "the longest walk", stepping gingerly into a 5ft deep and 8ft wide crater. The earth shifted slightly and he saw a Senao base station with a wire leading from it. He cut the wire and used his 7in knife to probe the ground. "I found a piece of red detonating cord between my legs," he says. "That's when I knew I was screwed."
Realizing he had been sucked into a trap, Sgt Burghardt, 35, yelled at everyone to stay back. At that moment, an insurgent, probably watching through binoculars, pressed a button on his mobile phone to detonate the secondary device below the sergeant's feet. "A chill went up the back of my neck and then the bomb exploded," he recalls. "As I was in the air I remember thinking, 'I don't believe they got me.' I was just ticked off they were able to do it. Then I was lying on the road, not able to feel anything from the waist down."
His colleagues cut off his trousers to see how badly he was hurt. None could believe his legs were still there. "My dad's a Vietnam vet who's paralyzed from the waist down," says Sgt Burghardt. "I was lying there thinking I didn't want to be in a wheelchair next to my dad and for him to see me like that. They started to cut away my pants and I felt a real sharp pain and blood trickling down. Then I wiggled my toes and I thought, 'Good, I'm in business. As a stretcher was brought over, adrenaline and anger kicked in. "I decided to walk to the helicopter. I wasn't going to let my team-mates see me being carried away on a stretcher." He stood and gave the insurgents who had blown him up a one-fingered salute. "I flipped them one. It was like, 'OK, I lost that round but I'll be back next week'."
Copies of a photograph depicting his defiance, taken by Jeff Bundy for the Omaha World-Herald, adorn the walls of homes across America and that of Col John Gronski, the brigade commander in Ramadi, who has hailed the image as an exemplar of the warrior spirit. Sgt Burghardt's injuries - burns and wounds to his legs and buttocks - kept him off duty for nearly a month and could have earned him a ticket home. But, like his father - who was awarded a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts for being wounded in action in Vietnam - he stayed in Ramadi to engage in the battle against insurgents who are forever coming up with more ingenious ways of killing Americans.
I heard the below story first hand last Saturday during a video teleconference between his Brigade Commander and the 28th Infantry Division Commander. I thought that others should hear it as well, as I think it demonstrates the true spirit of most of our troops on the ground (from my experience).
Leading the fight is Gunnery Sgt Michael Burghardt, known as "Iron Mike" or just "Gunny". He is on his third tour in Iraq. He had become a legend in the bomb disposal world after winning the Bronze Star for disabling 64 IEDs and destroying 1,548 pieces of ordnance during his second tour. Then, on September 19, he got blown up.
He had arrived at a chaotic scene after a bomb had killed four US soldiers. He chose not to wear the bulky bomb protection suit. "You can't react to any sniper fire and you get tunnel-vision," he explains. So, protected by just a helmet and standard-issue flak jacket, he began what bomb disposal officers term "the longest walk", stepping gingerly into a 5ft deep and 8ft wide crater. The earth shifted slightly and he saw a Senao base station with a wire leading from it. He cut the wire and used his 7in knife to probe the ground. "I found a piece of red detonating cord between my legs," he says. "That's when I knew I was screwed."
Realizing he had been sucked into a trap, Sgt Burghardt, 35, yelled at everyone to stay back. At that moment, an insurgent, probably watching through binoculars, pressed a button on his mobile phone to detonate the secondary device below the sergeant's feet. "A chill went up the back of my neck and then the bomb exploded," he recalls. "As I was in the air I remember thinking, 'I don't believe they got me.' I was just ticked off they were able to do it. Then I was lying on the road, not able to feel anything from the waist down."
His colleagues cut off his trousers to see how badly he was hurt. None could believe his legs were still there. "My dad's a Vietnam vet who's paralyzed from the waist down," says Sgt Burghardt. "I was lying there thinking I didn't want to be in a wheelchair next to my dad and for him to see me like that. They started to cut away my pants and I felt a real sharp pain and blood trickling down. Then I wiggled my toes and I thought, 'Good, I'm in business. As a stretcher was brought over, adrenaline and anger kicked in. "I decided to walk to the helicopter. I wasn't going to let my team-mates see me being carried away on a stretcher." He stood and gave the insurgents who had blown him up a one-fingered salute. "I flipped them one. It was like, 'OK, I lost that round but I'll be back next week'."
Copies of a photograph depicting his defiance, taken by Jeff Bundy for the Omaha World-Herald, adorn the walls of homes across America and that of Col John Gronski, the brigade commander in Ramadi, who has hailed the image as an exemplar of the warrior spirit. Sgt Burghardt's injuries - burns and wounds to his legs and buttocks - kept him off duty for nearly a month and could have earned him a ticket home. But, like his father - who was awarded a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts for being wounded in action in Vietnam - he stayed in Ramadi to engage in the battle against insurgents who are forever coming up with more ingenious ways of killing Americans.
Friday, January 06, 2006
Another US Soldier's Story.
One of Minnesota's Finest: Minnesota's Lt. Col. Joe Repya volunteered to return to active duty for service in Iraq at age 59. Joe's previous service includes command of a rifle platoon in Vietnam and flying helicopters in the first Gulf War. Joe is a classic citizen patriot and activist. He first came to public attention in March 2003 when, disturbed by the anti-war campaign mounted by Minnesota liberals, he arranged for the production of lawn signs saying "Liberate Iraq -- Support Our Troops." His effort garnered a lot of publicity, and Joe eventually distributed 30,000 signs. -------------------------------------------------
Today he writes: Two weeks ago, as I was starting my sixth month of duty in Iraq, I was forced to return to the USA for surgery for an injury I sustained prior to my deployment. With luck, I'll return to Iraq in January to finish my tour. I left Baghdad and a war that has every indication that we are winning, to return to a demoralized country much like the one I returned to in 1971 after my tour in Vietnam.
Maybe it's because I'll turn 60 years old in just four months, but I'm tired:
I'm tired of spineless politicians, both Democrat and Republican who lack the courage, fortitude, and character to see these difficult tasks through.
I'm tired of the hypocrisy of politicians who want to rewrite history when the going gets tough.
I'm tired of the disingenuous clamor from those that claim they "Support the Troops" by wanting them to "Cut and Run" before victory is achieved.
I'm tired of a mainstream media that can only focus on car bombs and casualty reports because they are too afraid to leave the safety of their hotels to report on the courage and success our brave men and women are having on the battlefield.
I'm tired that so many American's think you can rebuild a dictatorship into a democracy over night.
I'm tired that so many ignore the bravery of the Iraqi people to go to the voting booth and freely elect a Constitution and soon a permanent Parliament.
I'm tired of the so called "Elite Left" that prolongs this war by giving aid and comfort to our enemy, just as they did during the Vietnam War.
I'm tired of anti-war protesters showing up at the funerals of our fallen soldiers. A family who's loved ones gave their life in a just and noble cause, only to be cruelly tormented on the funeral day by cowardly protesters is beyond shameful.
I'm tired that my generation, the Baby Boom - Vietnam generation, who have such a weak backbone that they can't stomach seeing the difficult tasks through to victory.
I'm tired that some are more concerned about the treatment of captives then they are the slaughter and beheading of our citizens and allies.
I'm tired that when we find mass graves it is seldom reported by the press, but mistreat a prisoner and it is front page news.
Mostly, I'm tired that the people of this great nation didn't learn from history that there is no substitute for Victory.
Sincerely,
Joe Repya Lieutenant Colonel U. S. Army
101st Airborne Division
Today he writes: Two weeks ago, as I was starting my sixth month of duty in Iraq, I was forced to return to the USA for surgery for an injury I sustained prior to my deployment. With luck, I'll return to Iraq in January to finish my tour. I left Baghdad and a war that has every indication that we are winning, to return to a demoralized country much like the one I returned to in 1971 after my tour in Vietnam.
Maybe it's because I'll turn 60 years old in just four months, but I'm tired:
I'm tired of spineless politicians, both Democrat and Republican who lack the courage, fortitude, and character to see these difficult tasks through.
I'm tired of the hypocrisy of politicians who want to rewrite history when the going gets tough.
I'm tired of the disingenuous clamor from those that claim they "Support the Troops" by wanting them to "Cut and Run" before victory is achieved.
I'm tired of a mainstream media that can only focus on car bombs and casualty reports because they are too afraid to leave the safety of their hotels to report on the courage and success our brave men and women are having on the battlefield.
I'm tired that so many American's think you can rebuild a dictatorship into a democracy over night.
I'm tired that so many ignore the bravery of the Iraqi people to go to the voting booth and freely elect a Constitution and soon a permanent Parliament.
I'm tired of the so called "Elite Left" that prolongs this war by giving aid and comfort to our enemy, just as they did during the Vietnam War.
I'm tired of anti-war protesters showing up at the funerals of our fallen soldiers. A family who's loved ones gave their life in a just and noble cause, only to be cruelly tormented on the funeral day by cowardly protesters is beyond shameful.
I'm tired that my generation, the Baby Boom - Vietnam generation, who have such a weak backbone that they can't stomach seeing the difficult tasks through to victory.
I'm tired that some are more concerned about the treatment of captives then they are the slaughter and beheading of our citizens and allies.
I'm tired that when we find mass graves it is seldom reported by the press, but mistreat a prisoner and it is front page news.
Mostly, I'm tired that the people of this great nation didn't learn from history that there is no substitute for Victory.
Sincerely,
Joe Repya Lieutenant Colonel U. S. Army
101st Airborne Division
Tuesday, January 03, 2006
Saturday, December 31, 2005
Interesting Thought.
“Oh, for journalists and historians who would look only for truth and not merely for data that justify their politics and ideology.” –Peggy Noonan (speech writer for former President Reagan)
Thursday, December 29, 2005
The True American Hero
If you have ever wondered where the "Heroes" are in our War on Terror please read the following article.
Saturday, December 17, 2005
When will Americans (or at least the Democrats) realize we are at War.
The extremists have been attacking our way of life for over 20 years now. It wasn't until Sept 1, 2001 that we finally woke up. They came on to our soil and killed 3,000 cilivians. Now as time moves on we are falling asleep at the wheel. Sure we need to protect our liberties. We (Americans) need to come up with a set of "reasonable" safeguards and we need to give our "leaders", in particular our president, the powers and tools to win this war. Please don't let irresponsible people such as Mr. Feingold determine our destiny. We do not want to go where Mr. Feingold wants to take us. Read on.
Thursday, December 15, 2005
We are all Republicans. We are all Democrats. We are all Americans. We are all in this together.
'Do Some Soul Searching'
Why aren't the media telling the whole story about Iraq?
BY DONALD RUMSFELD
(Editor's note: Mr. Rumsfeld delivered this speech Monday at the School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University.)
I'm not one to put much faith in opinion polls. But the other day, I came across an interesting set of statistics that I want to mention. It seems that the Pew Research Center asked opinion leaders in the United States their views of the prospects for a stable democracy in Iraq.
Here were some of the results: 63% of people in the news media thought the enterprise would fail. So did 71% of people in the foreign affairs establishment and 71% in academic settings or think tanks.
Interestingly, opinion leaders from the U.S. military are optimistic about Iraq by a margin of 64% to 32%. And so is the American public, by a margin of 56% to 37%.
And the Iraqi people are also optimistic. I've seen this demonstrated repeatedly--in public opinion polls, in the turnout for the elections, and that tips to authorities from ordinary Iraqis have grown from 483 to 4,700 tips in a month.
This prompts the question: Which view of Iraq is more accurate? The pessimistic view of so-called elites in our country--or the optimism expressed by millions of Iraqis and by the roughly 158,000 troops on the ground? But, most important is the question: why should Iraq's success or failure matter to the American people? I'd like to address these questions today.
First, should we be optimistic or pessimistic about Iraq's future? The answer may depend on one's perspective. Indeed, one of the reasons that views of Iraq are so divergent is that we may be looking at Iraq through different prisms of experience and expectation.
For starters, it must be jarring for reporters who have never covered the Middle East to leave the United States and arrive in a country that is so different, where they consistently have to worry about their personal safety, then are rushed to the scene of car bombs and shootings, and have little opportunity to see the rest of the country.
By contrast, the Iraqi people see things somewhat differently: They can compare as it is Iraq today, to what it was three years ago--a brutal dictatorship where the secret police would murder or mutilate a family member sometimes in front of their children, and where hundreds of thousands disappeared into Saddam's mass graves. From that perspective, Iraq today is on a vastly different, and a greatly improved path.
If one is viewing events through a soda straw, one should know that one is by definition selectively focusing on facts that may highlight one's perceived view and not seeing other perspectives. A full picture of Iraq comes best from an understanding of both the good and the bad, and the context for each.
Among the continuing difficulties are: Bursts of violence, including continued assassinations and attempts to intimidate Iraqi leaders and those supporting the legitimate Iraqi government.
Continuing U.S. and Iraqi casualties. Iran and Syria continue to be notably unhelpful.
However, there are also a number of positive developments to be seen, if one looks for them:
The political process is on schedule. Iraqis have a Constitution they wrote and voted for, and hundreds of candidates are politicking for the elections. There seem to be growing divisions among the enemies of the Iraqi people, particularly after the bombing of a wedding reception in Amman, Jordan.
More of Iraq's neighbors now seem to believe this new democracy might succeed and are moving to get right with the Iraqi people by being more active in their support. A vital and engaged media is emerging, with some 100 newspapers, 72 radio stations, and 44 television stations. Sunnis are increasingly taking part in the political process, further isolating those who still oppose the legitimate Iraqi government.
To be responsible, one needs to stop defining success in Iraq as the absence of terrorist attacks. As Sen. Joe Lieberman recently suggested, a better measure of success might be that a vast majority of Iraqis--tens of millions--are on the side of the democratic government, while a comparatively small number are opposed. This gives the Iraqi people an enormous advantage over time.
The other question I posed is of critical importance: why does Iraq's success or failure matter to the American people?
Consider this quote: "What you have seen, Americans, in New York and Washington, D.C., and the losses you are having in Afghanistan and Iraq, in spite of all the media blackout, are only the losses of the initial clashes."
The speaker is Ayman al-Zawahiri, a senior member of the terrorist group al Qaeda and a top leader in the effort to defeat U.S. and coalition forces around the world. The terrorists' method of attack, simply put, is slaughter. They behead. They bomb children. They attack funerals and wedding receptions.
This is the kind of brutality and mayhem the terrorists are working to bring to our shores. And if we do not succeed in our efforts to arm and train Iraqis to help defeat these terrorists in Iraq, this is the kind of mayhem that a terrorist, emboldened by a victory, will bring to our cities again--let there be no doubt.
Indeed, the most important reason for our involvement in Iraq--despite the cost--is often overlooked. It is not only about building democracy, though democracies tend to be peaceful and prosperous and are in and of themselves good things. It is not about reopening Iraqi schools and hospitals or rebuilding infrastructure, though they are proceeding apace and are desirable and essential to ensure stability. But, simply put, defeating extremist aspirations in Iraq is essential to protect the lives of Americans here at home.
Imagine the world our children would face if we allowed Zawahiri, Zarqawi, bin Laden and others of their ilk to seize power or operate with impunity out of Iraq. They would turn Iraq into what Afghanistan was before 9/11--a haven for terrorist recruitment and training and a launching pad for attacks against U.S. interests and our fellow citizens. Iraq would serve as the base of a new Islamic caliphate to extend throughout the Middle East and to threaten legitimate governments throughout the world . This is their plan. They have said so. We should listen and learn.
Quitting is not a strategy. Quitting is an invitation to more attacks and more terrorist violence here at home. This is not just an hypothesis. The U.S. withdrawal from Somalia emboldened Osama bin Laden in the 1990s. We know this. He has said so.
The message retreat in Iraq would send to the free people of Iraq and to moderate Muslim reformers throughout the region would be that they can't count on America. The message it would send to our enemies would be: that if America will not defend itself against terrorists in Iraq, it will not defend itself against terrorists anywhere.
What is needed is resolve, not retreat; courage, not concession. Rather than thinking in terms of an exit strategy, we should be focused on a strategy for success. The president's strategy focuses on progress on the political, economic, and security tracks. You can read that strategy paper on the White House's Web site.
On the security side, some 214,000 Iraqi security forces have been trained and equipped. Working with coalition forces, they are steadily improving in experience and capability:
Coalition forces have handed over military bases to Iraqi control and a complex of palaces in Saddam Hussein's hometown of Tikrit. Iraqi forces are improving their control of the Western borders of Iraq, with coalition support. The Shiite areas of Najaf, Karbala and Sadr City, the scenes of battles last year, are considerably more peaceful. In Tal Afar, 5,000 Iraqi troops took a key role in liberating and securing what had been a base of operations for extremists' networks and foreign networks.
I began these remarks by mentioning the jarring contrast between what the American people are reading and hearing about Iraq and the views of the Iraqi people. I don't think we can close a discussion on Iraq without mentioning the media coverage and the current political debate.
Recently, a member of the Associated Press Managing Editors Association recounted intense discussions within the AP over whether or not their coverage of Iraq has been slanted. For my part, almost every time I meet with troops, I am asked the same question. They ask, why are the American people being given a pessimistic, inaccurate picture of what is happening in Iraq?
But let me say something in defense of the media. They have a tough job. Many reporters in Afghanistan and Iraq have done excellent reporting, and some have lost their lives.
And consider what would result if the federal government had to put out a daily newspaper or a daily television program. You can probably imagine what the bureaucrats would come up with: conflicting rules and regulations, an army of lawyers to sort through all the conflicts, a multitude of auditors to check up on everyone, a mammoth bill to the taxpayers, followed by congressional investigations of why they missed their daily deadline.
The media serves a valuable--indeed an indispensable--role in informing our society and holding government to account. But I would submit it is also important for the media to hold itself to account.
We have arrived at a strange time in this country when the worst about America and our military seems to be so quickly taken as truth by the press and reported and spread around the world--with little or no context or scrutiny--let alone correction or accountability--even after the fact.
Speed, it appears, is often the first goal--not accuracy, not context.
Recently there were claims by two Iraqis on a speaking tour that U.S. soldiers threw them in a cage with lions. Their charges were widely reported--still without substantiation. Not too long ago, there was a false and damaging story about a Koran supposedly flushed down a toilet, and in the riots that followed people were killed. And a recent New York Times editorial implied America's armed forces--your armed forces--use tactics reminiscent of Saddam Hussein.
I understand that there may be great pressure on them to tell a dramatic story. And while it is easy to use a bombing or a terrorist attack to support a belief that Iraq is a failure, that is not the accurate picture. And further, it is not good journalism.
Consider this: You couldn't tell the full story of Iwo Jima simply by listing the nearly 26,000 American casualties over about 40 days; or explain the importance of Grant's push to Virginia just by noting the savagery of the battles. So too, in Iraq, it is appropriate to note not only how many Americans have been killed--and may God bless them and their families--but what they died for--or more accurately, what they lived for.
So I suggest to editors and reporters--whose good intentions I take for granted--to do some soul searching. To ask: how will history judge--if it does--the reporting decades from now when Iraq's path is settled?
I would urge us all to make every effort to ensure we are telling the whole story. To take a moment for self-reflection and reassessment.
Further it is worth noting that there are 158,000 Americans in uniform who are sending e-mails back to friends and families, telling them the truth as they see it. And much of it is different than what those in the United States are seeing and reading about every day.
Our country is waging a battle unlike any other in history. We are waging it in a media age unlike any that war fighters have ever known. In this new century, we all need to make adjustments--in government and in the media. And change is hard.
But to paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, we are all Republicans. We are all Democrats. We are all Americans. We are all in this together. And what we do today will not only impact us, but our children and our grandchildren, and the kind of world they will live in.
Mr. Rumsfeld is secretary of defense.
Why aren't the media telling the whole story about Iraq?
BY DONALD RUMSFELD
(Editor's note: Mr. Rumsfeld delivered this speech Monday at the School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University.)
I'm not one to put much faith in opinion polls. But the other day, I came across an interesting set of statistics that I want to mention. It seems that the Pew Research Center asked opinion leaders in the United States their views of the prospects for a stable democracy in Iraq.
Here were some of the results: 63% of people in the news media thought the enterprise would fail. So did 71% of people in the foreign affairs establishment and 71% in academic settings or think tanks.
Interestingly, opinion leaders from the U.S. military are optimistic about Iraq by a margin of 64% to 32%. And so is the American public, by a margin of 56% to 37%.
And the Iraqi people are also optimistic. I've seen this demonstrated repeatedly--in public opinion polls, in the turnout for the elections, and that tips to authorities from ordinary Iraqis have grown from 483 to 4,700 tips in a month.
This prompts the question: Which view of Iraq is more accurate? The pessimistic view of so-called elites in our country--or the optimism expressed by millions of Iraqis and by the roughly 158,000 troops on the ground? But, most important is the question: why should Iraq's success or failure matter to the American people? I'd like to address these questions today.
First, should we be optimistic or pessimistic about Iraq's future? The answer may depend on one's perspective. Indeed, one of the reasons that views of Iraq are so divergent is that we may be looking at Iraq through different prisms of experience and expectation.
For starters, it must be jarring for reporters who have never covered the Middle East to leave the United States and arrive in a country that is so different, where they consistently have to worry about their personal safety, then are rushed to the scene of car bombs and shootings, and have little opportunity to see the rest of the country.
By contrast, the Iraqi people see things somewhat differently: They can compare as it is Iraq today, to what it was three years ago--a brutal dictatorship where the secret police would murder or mutilate a family member sometimes in front of their children, and where hundreds of thousands disappeared into Saddam's mass graves. From that perspective, Iraq today is on a vastly different, and a greatly improved path.
If one is viewing events through a soda straw, one should know that one is by definition selectively focusing on facts that may highlight one's perceived view and not seeing other perspectives. A full picture of Iraq comes best from an understanding of both the good and the bad, and the context for each.
Among the continuing difficulties are: Bursts of violence, including continued assassinations and attempts to intimidate Iraqi leaders and those supporting the legitimate Iraqi government.
Continuing U.S. and Iraqi casualties. Iran and Syria continue to be notably unhelpful.
However, there are also a number of positive developments to be seen, if one looks for them:
The political process is on schedule. Iraqis have a Constitution they wrote and voted for, and hundreds of candidates are politicking for the elections. There seem to be growing divisions among the enemies of the Iraqi people, particularly after the bombing of a wedding reception in Amman, Jordan.
More of Iraq's neighbors now seem to believe this new democracy might succeed and are moving to get right with the Iraqi people by being more active in their support. A vital and engaged media is emerging, with some 100 newspapers, 72 radio stations, and 44 television stations. Sunnis are increasingly taking part in the political process, further isolating those who still oppose the legitimate Iraqi government.
To be responsible, one needs to stop defining success in Iraq as the absence of terrorist attacks. As Sen. Joe Lieberman recently suggested, a better measure of success might be that a vast majority of Iraqis--tens of millions--are on the side of the democratic government, while a comparatively small number are opposed. This gives the Iraqi people an enormous advantage over time.
The other question I posed is of critical importance: why does Iraq's success or failure matter to the American people?
Consider this quote: "What you have seen, Americans, in New York and Washington, D.C., and the losses you are having in Afghanistan and Iraq, in spite of all the media blackout, are only the losses of the initial clashes."
The speaker is Ayman al-Zawahiri, a senior member of the terrorist group al Qaeda and a top leader in the effort to defeat U.S. and coalition forces around the world. The terrorists' method of attack, simply put, is slaughter. They behead. They bomb children. They attack funerals and wedding receptions.
This is the kind of brutality and mayhem the terrorists are working to bring to our shores. And if we do not succeed in our efforts to arm and train Iraqis to help defeat these terrorists in Iraq, this is the kind of mayhem that a terrorist, emboldened by a victory, will bring to our cities again--let there be no doubt.
Indeed, the most important reason for our involvement in Iraq--despite the cost--is often overlooked. It is not only about building democracy, though democracies tend to be peaceful and prosperous and are in and of themselves good things. It is not about reopening Iraqi schools and hospitals or rebuilding infrastructure, though they are proceeding apace and are desirable and essential to ensure stability. But, simply put, defeating extremist aspirations in Iraq is essential to protect the lives of Americans here at home.
Imagine the world our children would face if we allowed Zawahiri, Zarqawi, bin Laden and others of their ilk to seize power or operate with impunity out of Iraq. They would turn Iraq into what Afghanistan was before 9/11--a haven for terrorist recruitment and training and a launching pad for attacks against U.S. interests and our fellow citizens. Iraq would serve as the base of a new Islamic caliphate to extend throughout the Middle East and to threaten legitimate governments throughout the world . This is their plan. They have said so. We should listen and learn.
Quitting is not a strategy. Quitting is an invitation to more attacks and more terrorist violence here at home. This is not just an hypothesis. The U.S. withdrawal from Somalia emboldened Osama bin Laden in the 1990s. We know this. He has said so.
The message retreat in Iraq would send to the free people of Iraq and to moderate Muslim reformers throughout the region would be that they can't count on America. The message it would send to our enemies would be: that if America will not defend itself against terrorists in Iraq, it will not defend itself against terrorists anywhere.
What is needed is resolve, not retreat; courage, not concession. Rather than thinking in terms of an exit strategy, we should be focused on a strategy for success. The president's strategy focuses on progress on the political, economic, and security tracks. You can read that strategy paper on the White House's Web site.
On the security side, some 214,000 Iraqi security forces have been trained and equipped. Working with coalition forces, they are steadily improving in experience and capability:
Coalition forces have handed over military bases to Iraqi control and a complex of palaces in Saddam Hussein's hometown of Tikrit. Iraqi forces are improving their control of the Western borders of Iraq, with coalition support. The Shiite areas of Najaf, Karbala and Sadr City, the scenes of battles last year, are considerably more peaceful. In Tal Afar, 5,000 Iraqi troops took a key role in liberating and securing what had been a base of operations for extremists' networks and foreign networks.
I began these remarks by mentioning the jarring contrast between what the American people are reading and hearing about Iraq and the views of the Iraqi people. I don't think we can close a discussion on Iraq without mentioning the media coverage and the current political debate.
Recently, a member of the Associated Press Managing Editors Association recounted intense discussions within the AP over whether or not their coverage of Iraq has been slanted. For my part, almost every time I meet with troops, I am asked the same question. They ask, why are the American people being given a pessimistic, inaccurate picture of what is happening in Iraq?
But let me say something in defense of the media. They have a tough job. Many reporters in Afghanistan and Iraq have done excellent reporting, and some have lost their lives.
And consider what would result if the federal government had to put out a daily newspaper or a daily television program. You can probably imagine what the bureaucrats would come up with: conflicting rules and regulations, an army of lawyers to sort through all the conflicts, a multitude of auditors to check up on everyone, a mammoth bill to the taxpayers, followed by congressional investigations of why they missed their daily deadline.
The media serves a valuable--indeed an indispensable--role in informing our society and holding government to account. But I would submit it is also important for the media to hold itself to account.
We have arrived at a strange time in this country when the worst about America and our military seems to be so quickly taken as truth by the press and reported and spread around the world--with little or no context or scrutiny--let alone correction or accountability--even after the fact.
Speed, it appears, is often the first goal--not accuracy, not context.
Recently there were claims by two Iraqis on a speaking tour that U.S. soldiers threw them in a cage with lions. Their charges were widely reported--still without substantiation. Not too long ago, there was a false and damaging story about a Koran supposedly flushed down a toilet, and in the riots that followed people were killed. And a recent New York Times editorial implied America's armed forces--your armed forces--use tactics reminiscent of Saddam Hussein.
I understand that there may be great pressure on them to tell a dramatic story. And while it is easy to use a bombing or a terrorist attack to support a belief that Iraq is a failure, that is not the accurate picture. And further, it is not good journalism.
Consider this: You couldn't tell the full story of Iwo Jima simply by listing the nearly 26,000 American casualties over about 40 days; or explain the importance of Grant's push to Virginia just by noting the savagery of the battles. So too, in Iraq, it is appropriate to note not only how many Americans have been killed--and may God bless them and their families--but what they died for--or more accurately, what they lived for.
So I suggest to editors and reporters--whose good intentions I take for granted--to do some soul searching. To ask: how will history judge--if it does--the reporting decades from now when Iraq's path is settled?
I would urge us all to make every effort to ensure we are telling the whole story. To take a moment for self-reflection and reassessment.
Further it is worth noting that there are 158,000 Americans in uniform who are sending e-mails back to friends and families, telling them the truth as they see it. And much of it is different than what those in the United States are seeing and reading about every day.
Our country is waging a battle unlike any other in history. We are waging it in a media age unlike any that war fighters have ever known. In this new century, we all need to make adjustments--in government and in the media. And change is hard.
But to paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, we are all Republicans. We are all Democrats. We are all Americans. We are all in this together. And what we do today will not only impact us, but our children and our grandchildren, and the kind of world they will live in.
Mr. Rumsfeld is secretary of defense.
Monday, December 12, 2005
Our Military has a Higher Calling
War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
John Stuart MillEnglish economist & philosopher (1806 - 1873)
John Stuart MillEnglish economist & philosopher (1806 - 1873)
Friday, December 09, 2005
The Media's Responsibility
Should our Media be held accountantable for the deaths they may cause as a result of their biased reporting? Read on.
Tuesday, December 06, 2005
Election Progress in Iraq
An Iraqi man hangs election campaign posters for the Iraqi Consensus Front carrying portraits of Al Hewar National Iraqi Council leader Khalaf Elayyan, left, Iraqi Islamic Party leader Tariq Al Hashimi, center. (see picture below)
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
Some Leaders Choose to Lead
Some leaders would rather play the blame game or run around trying to protect their jobs. Some leaders lead. Thank you Senator Lieberman for being a leader. Read on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)