From a Sgt. on the ground in Afganistan

[Kiel_Everett]

It makes you really think, when it comes from the mouth of somebody who is actually there. Not thousands of miles away.

I keep our men and women over there in my prayers every night and I hope all you do the same, despite your religious beliefs.

[retired]

I was going to send copies of this to my two Senators, but then considering who they are, I realized it would be a waste of time. Plus, since I have to give my name and email address to them to send it, I will receive spam from them.

They won't change their minds and it took over a month for them to stop sending me email spam.

Who are they. Well, I'm from Ca. as you can see, so most might have figured out Boxer and Feinstien.

[FrankRizzoXD40]

I would like to see some of the liberals on this forum quote that soldier's post and make a point by point arguement of why they disagree with him.

Even if these leftists won't respond, it would be pretty easy to take some of their past posts about the war and create a reply.

Are bd, eleanor and others willing to repeat some of the things they have said about this war in this thread??

Frank

[Delija]

Somehow I tend to doubt the authenticity of the letter. I have been in this kind of guerrilla combat and from my experience I don't recall any sane American soldiers having such a blood lust. It was about self preservation, and protecting the survival of our comrades. It was not about doing as much killing as possible (which seems to be the tone of this supposed "letter").

Also, the labelling of all Democrats seems somewhat too contrived. Sounds too much like a well planned bit of anti-Democrat propaganda, such as we would expect from certain elements of our society.....be they civilian, military, or governmental. ("I don’t know about the ignorant, treasonous Democrats and the completely insane radical leftists and their thoughts on the matter")

I of course could be wrong, but this "letter" seems not to ring true IMO.

The overall theme that we are not doing enough killing seems to be contrary to the current "war plan" (for what it's worth). Our stated intent was never to invade Iraq and kill as many of the "enemy" as possible. We'd need to go back several years to compile a list of what our supposed objectives were (they changed so many times, we need a program to tell what was what and when), but killing was never our prime objective.

Also, this soldier (if he is one) seems to be enraged about our actions in Iraq, while he has been serving in Afghanistan....two quite different places. What does ring true is he certainly sounds like a non-com. Or many I knew. Incredulous that he has to listen to officers he feels are unqualified to make the kinds of decisions he himself feels better suited to make. That is certainly a common trait among our non-commissioned men. Having said that, I respect most and I fully recognize that it is they that (in general) hold things together (some would say they "run" the military), but it is more than common that their zeal can be over-done and in cases like this, overstated. They have a job to do, and most do it very well. But making policy is never one of their jobs. Nor should it be.

It struck me particularly that he mentioned that he'd prefer to see combat troops rather than drone aircraft for certain "seek and destroy" missions. I wonder how those (not sitting in Afghanistan, but facing real armed and dangerous enemies in Iraq) would feel about foregoing our best technology in favor of more dangerous and dirtier jobs. Or how those soldier's families and loved ones would feel. Not everyone has this "Rambo" mentality. Most want to live to return to America in one piece.

Again, could be me, but this letter from a "staff sergeant" seems too contrived and far too political to have a ring of authenticity. Particularly since it seems to say what a very specific segment of our population seems to want to hear......a segment that for the most part has never and will likely never actually participate in combat. The living room soldiers - our countless arm-chair commandos that don't find any problem with the blood of others. This war (like any) is not a Hollywood movie. Blood is real, pain is real, death is very final.

These very same people seem to have no problem with the Pentagon's and the Bush administration's policy of forbidding news organizations from showing images of the homecomings of the war dead at military bases. Sweep the unpleasant under the rug. What you can't see can't trouble you.

But try as they may (and do) to hide all this unpleasantness, these are real people, real Americans dying. Often for no necessary reason, and yet here we have a supposed ground soldier in Afghanistan clamoring for more dangerous assignments for his comrades. (And calling half of Americans "traitors", etc.).

If this sounds legit to some readers (as it apparently does), I find that a sad commentary on where many of us seemingly have placed our beliefs regarding how to fight a war (particularly an undeclared war against an unorganized enemy that could probably be won through attrition alone - assuming our resources were applied to better intelligence and a concerted effort to out-think the enemy and to try and understand their culture and use brainpower to a greater extent).

In the America I grew up in; the America I love (and always have and always will) - the America I served and bled for, the foremost objective of our military was to assure the survival of as many of our fighting men (and now women) as possible, and to fight with a stated and clear objective. Not to send our troops to some open ended conflict and not to kill one more of the enemy than is absolutely necessary to prevail. Now with this "letter", all this called for killing almost certainly will create more of the enemy than we can eliminate. Kill a father, and the children become potential terrorists. Along with friends, neighbors, etc. We hear the term "terrorist breeding grounds". How many of these are our own creations?

Peace,
D.

[TobyU]

Delija stated
"In the America I grew up in; the America I love (and always have and always will) - the America I served and bled for, the foremost objective of our military was to assure the survival of as many of our fighting men (and now women) as possible, and to fight with a stated and clear objective."

It seems most people I know that have served in combat have the first, foremost goal or "Destoying the Enemy" and they are hardcore about this.
They understand they might lose a man or two in their unit, they themselves might be one, but the goal is to get the job done. The "job" many times goes well beyond the "stated and clear objective" at least to them it does.
This brings up another good problem...
The soldiers are afraid to do anything because their own govt will destroy their lives for it.
In the way wars are supposed to be fought....anything short of the deliberate killing of innocent women and children is fair game.
I don't think the US has done much good war fighting since WWII. I wasn't around then so maybe it was same.
It just seems that since Vietnam, the punches are always pulled.
You hear many people support such great powerful actions, but I haven't seen it. Comments about making parking lots out of cities/countries....
Will we ever fight for real....not political half assed, PC, with gloves on war?
I guess I am of the mentality that you should
"Hit them so hard as to put the fear of God into them. Put things in order and send the troops home. Make sure the other country knows....Don't make us come back!"

[FrankRizzoXD40]

Originally Posted by Delija

Somehow I tend to doubt the authenticity of the letter.

Haha! Of course you would. Do you really think that your personal experience from 30 years ago trumps this personal letter from a soldier? Even if it is made-up, how do you explain similair stories that I and others have heard from our friends who have returned home. Apparently if something doesn't agree with your internal bias then it is automatically a lie fostered by the opposition

I hope that someone can get this soldiers address for you so that you can write him a letter telling him that you think he's wrong and that you think its all a lie.

Originally Posted by Delija

I have been in this kind of guerrilla combat and from my experience I don't recall any sane American soldiers having such a blood lust. It was about self preservation, and protecting the survival of our comrades. It was not about doing as much killing as possible (which seems to be the tone of this supposed "letter").

Where is the "blood lust"? He is writing that he wants to defeat the enemy. Isn't that the flipping goal in wars? To kill the enemy? That is why a modern-day liberal mindset in a war always leads us to defeat. This kind of mindset doesn't even understand the goals of war. You have proved this point.

Originally Posted by Delija

The overall theme that we are not doing enough killing seems to be contrary to the current "war plan" (for what it's worth). Our stated intent was never to invade Iraq and kill as many of the "enemy" as possible. We'd need to go back several years to compile a list of what our supposed objectives were (they changed so many times, we need a program to tell what was what and when), but killing was never our prime objective.

Isn't the goal of war to defeat the enemy? Is Bush sending more troops to NOT go and kill the terrorists? I'm pretty sure that he slackened the ROE to make this easier for them. He said that we were going to clear out terrorist hotspots using force.

Originally Posted by Delija

I wonder how those (not sitting in Afghanistan, but facing real armed and dangerous enemies in Iraq) would feel about foregoing our best technology in favor of more dangerous and dirtier jobs.

Oh, so our soldiers in Afghanistan are just "sitting" there? They aren't facing "real armed and dangerous enemies"?? WTF.....brave men and women are dying there everyday fighting terrorists. Where do you get your information? There are firefights almost daily between US soldiers and Taliban remnants.

Originally Posted by Delija

These very same people seem to have no problem with the Pentagon's and the Bush administration's policy of forbidding news organizations from showing images of the homecomings of the war dead at military bases. Sweep the unpleasant under the rug. What you can't see can't trouble you.

If the Bush admin was really controlling the news as you say, then why do they allow CNN to air video footage of terrorists killing US soldiers?

Originally Posted by Delija

In the America I grew up in; the America I love (and always have and always will) - the America I served and bled for, the foremost objective of our military was to assure the survival of as many of our fighting men (and now women) as possible, and to fight with a stated and clear objective.

The goal of war is to defeat/kill the enemy. The "foremost" objective is not to unsure the "survival of as many of our fighting men as possible". That's called playing defense. The objective is to kill the enemy. It is as simple as that. When politics gets too involved, we end up with things like the current situation in Iraq.

Frank

[Delija]

Originally Posted by FrankRizzoXD40

Apparently if something doesn't agree with your internal bias then it is automatically a lie fostered by the opposition

I did not say it was a "lie"....I said that IMO is did not ring true.

I realize that NO MATTER what opinion I ever express here, you will find a way to argue with it.

You talk about all those you know and talk to that have returned. How many is that?

You say my experiences from 30 years ago (or so) is not relevant. What puts you in a position to evaluate?

Where is the hard and fast rule written that no matter what I say you must disagree?

Or is it more about attaining your goal to average 20 posts per day (getting close; 19.34 as of now), and the content is just filler?

I truly think you should enlist and serve in combat and then get back to me about what it is really like. Same with "TobyU"....anyone who has served in combat knows that it is NOT about doing as much killing as possible. The primary objective is to LIVE. And to make sure that as many as your comrades LIVE. Even if it is just to fight another day. Dead soldiers can't accomplish anything.

Peace,
D.

[FrankRizzoXD40]

Originally Posted by Delija

I realize that NO MATTER what opinion I ever express here, you will find a way to argue with it.....

Where is the hard and fast rule written that no matter what I say you must disagree?

There isn't any such rule. Here is an example of me agreeing with you.

Originally Posted by FrankRizzoXD40

I post if I disagree with you because I disagree with you. If I agree, I will post that as well. Should there be some kind of limit as to how much I am allowed to disagree with you?

-------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by Delija

You talk about all those you know and talk to that have returned. How many is that?

What difference does it make? I have two friends who were there and their stories are very similar to the opening post of this thread.

Originally Posted by Delija

You say my experiences from 30 years ago (or so) is not relevant.

Actually, I didn't say they weren't relevant. I said that, on the subjec tof Iraq, your personal experiences from 30 years ago are not going to trump those of a soldier who is actually there. He knows what is going on now. You know what went on in Vietnam. Your personal experiences would obviously be more accurate than his if we were talking about Vietnam, but we aren't.

Originally Posted by Delija

Or is it more about attaining your goal to average 20 posts per day (getting close; 19.34 as of now), and the content is just filler?

Ahhhh, you have returned to bashing people for their post counts AND their spelling errors in the same day! Is this because YOU have run out of content? Why don't you judge people for what they post instead of how many posts they have and/or their spelling ability?

Originally Posted by Delija

I truly think you should enlist and serve in combat and then get back to me about what it is really like.

Just a couple of months ago you told me that I shouldn't even be allowed to carry firearms (that sounds like a far-left view to me). Would you really send me into battle without weapons

We are talking about a letter from someone who HAS served. We already have a perspective of what is going on in Iraq, which is what I am talking about--his perspective. Why do I need to serve in order to have an opinion about the perspective of someone who has?

Originally Posted by Delija

anyone who has served in combat knows that it is NOT about doing as much killing as possible. The primary objective is to LIVE. And to make sure that as many as your comrades LIVE. Even if it is just to fight another day. Dead soldiers can't accomplish anything.

The objective is to destroy the enemy. You are right, "dead soldiers can't accomplish anything." That is why you kill the enemy soldiers/fighters.

Frank

[Broadside]

I agree with the letter. Fundamentally we need to pull the press out of the embeded units and spoon feed them. If they want to run around and keep getting killed that decision is left up to them. They have too much free range in a War Zone and report only what they think they see. They are not experts in military combat, tactics and strategy. All they do is show selected parts of video and lift their leg and talk like they are experts. From the theme of the letter pulling out the press or stop protecting them would fix 1/2 the problems.

[FrankRizzoXD40]

Originally Posted by Broadside

I agree with the letter. Fundamentally we need to pull the press out of the embeded units and spoon feed them. If they want to run around and keep getting killed that decision is left up to them. They have too much free range in a War Zone and report only what they think they see. They are not experts in military combat, tactics and strategy. All they do is show selected parts of video and lift their leg and talk like they are experts. From the theme of the letter pulling out the press or stop protecting them would fix 1/2 the problems.

Great post!

Frank