Message to Obama video from one of the troops
|
|
| Very powerful. Very moving. |
| I agree that the people of Iraq are people just like we are: they want the same basic things: to raise their families, to have a peaceful, secure life. I actually have known a number of people, both Christian and Muslim from Iraq, prior to this conflict.
My son recently returned from Afghanistan, where he served with the 82nd. Airborne. I asked him to watch the video and to tell me what he thought. He disagreed with the young man speaking about whether or not the U.S. should be in Iraq. Although he did not serve in Iraq, he knew many, many soldiers who did. One of his friends is the recipient of 2 bronze stars for valor while serving in Iraq. According to my son, the men he knew who were in combat in Iraq did not think we should be there. I am not posting out of disrespect for any of the men and women who serve or have served our armed forces in any capacity. I am posting to let you know that not all service members who saw armed combat have the same viewpoint. |
tgir wrote: I am not posting out of disrespect for any of the men and women who serve or have served our armed forces in any capacity. I am posting to let you know that not all service members who saw armed combat have the same viewpoint.
Of course. Nobody can disagree with the fact that the Iraqis want a peaceful and secure life. Nobody has. What we can disagree with is the premise in which we went there and caused the death and destruction that we have caused. For the soldier or anybody else to insinuate that people who disagree with this war are disrespecting the military is short-sighted and manipulative. They are the people who respect the military and freedom the most, because they would never sacrifice those lives for an unjust war. |
rdf wrote: tgir wrote: I am not posting out of disrespect for any of the men and women who serve or have served our armed forces in any capacity. I am posting to let you know that not all service members who saw armed combat have the same viewpoint. Of course. Nobody can disagree with the fact that the Iraqis want a peaceful and secure life. Nobody has. What we can disagree with is the premise in which we went there and caused the death and destruction that we have caused. For the soldier or anybody else to insinuate that people who disagree with this war are disrespecting the military is short-sighted and manipulative. They are the people who respect the military and freedom the most, because they would never sacrifice those lives for an unjust war. I, for one, would never call a soldier who has lost his leg in combat ( as the video makes us believe) short sighted or manipulative. He has more than earned his right to speak what he feels and believes. |
| Yes, of course the soldier has a right to state his opinion. As do we all, whether we have worn a military uniform or not.
However, since 9/11, it seems that there have been a concerted effort to call into question the patriotism and the loyalty of any one who disagrees with the war with Iraq or how that war is being conducted. Through manipulation, people have been made to feel disloyal and disrespectful for speaking their opinion, even being called traitors, and giving aid to the enemy for saying that they believe the premise for going to war was wrong. To me, this is unconscionable. Among our very most precious freedoms is the freedom to express our opinions, even if they are contrary to the majority opinion or the opinion of any governmental body. Having worked with people from many parts of the world, I can say with confidence that this is one of the ideals, one of the freedoms that America is most admired for holding close: freedom of speech, even objectionable speech. Many people in other parts of the world have no such freedom. There is no question that the young man in the video made a tremendous sacrifice. However, it is simply not true that all military personnel agree with his position regarding the war in Iraq. This difference of opinion is not disrespectful or disloyal in any way. It is both a right and a duty. |
| This is all true. However it is also true that our global adversaries do not understand the "American Way" of free speech and dissent, therefore the price for our free speech is that our adversaries see us as not unified, and therefore weak.
This may be a reason that Saddam Hussein did not understand that the US was going to carry out the wishes of the President (in either action, 91 or 03), and why Iran went from contrition and opening up about its nuclear program (as did Lybia) to becoming belligerent when the US public's opinion turned towards being against continuation of the war. I'm not saying our free speech is a bad thing, nor am I saying that people and/or politicians shouldn't shout their opinions from the rafters. But there are costs to it and our wise politicians on both sides of the aisle ought to know when to support their President's actions even when they disagree for the benefit of the soldiers on the ground, and when the disagreement is so strong that it warrants the added cost in terms of US human life. If their arguments will not be successful and will only prolong the conflict by emboldening our adversaries.... well... it's a very difficult thing to balance. I'm glad I don't need to make those kinds of real world decisions. In the meantime.... regardless of your politics, with Youtube around this may be a VERY humorous race!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YooKkyikXw0&rss |
Quote: This is all true. However it is also true that our global adversaries do not understand the "American Way" of free speech and dissent, therefore the price for our free speech is that our adversaries see us as not unified, and therefore weak.
I don't think this is really true. Again, based upon the years I spent working with the diplomatic community. I DO believe that our adversaries do try to use dissent as part of their propaganda machines--as do our own leaders. Many of the members of the international community (and plain, everyday ordinary people, some of whom were newly minted U.S. citizens--or on their way to becoming such) had a sort of love/hate relationship with American ideals: they loved and admired the freedom of expression--of thought, of religious views, of personal/philosphical/political views as much as they wrestled with the idea of the tension between personal vs collective or national, if you will, needs. Made for very interesting conversations. Politically, this is much more surpressed--on our side as well as on the other sides. What I have seen--over and over and over again--is many people struggle to express support for our troops, regardless of whether or not they agree with the war--and there are many who support as well as those who oppose the war. Of this, I am extremely proud. I am old enough to remember that this was not the case with some of our returning soldiers, back in the days of Viet Nam. I see--very frequently--how much people go out of their way to show support for returning soldiers. My son is growing out his military haircut, but it is impossible to mistake him as anyone other than someone who was recently in the military. So, yes, I do see this, and appreciate it very much, as does my son. |
| You may be right, but what I remember seeing was a very nervous Lybia giving up their nuclear program in its entirety; a nervous Iran opening up about its nuclear program and voluntarily stopping.
When loud dissent arose beginning with Howard Dean, Iran resumed its nuclear program. I bet Libya wishes it had just made a token gesture... Oh well. I gave our President the benefit of the doubt when he and Russia and France and others seemed to believe that Iraq possessed WMD. Personally I didn't think the President needed any pretense to go to war; it would have been much simpler to simply resume the ceased military activity related to the first war, due to constant and repeated violations of the cease fire including shooting at our planes and refusal to cooperate with weapons inspectors. Personally I fault Rumsfeld for being a complete idiot and a jerk ("Old Europe?" "Greeted with flowers"? "Dead enders"? "Win it with 150,000 troops"? (In the first war we deployed more than 500,000)), and I fault the President as Commander-in-Chief for not realizing he had an idiot on his staff in charge of the war. After Rumsfeld was discharged, things got better. (I had a passing familiarity with Rumsfeld; he was CEO of a pharmaceuticals company that was in the diabetes industry which at the time I was covering closely due to a couple of investments I held. He was an idiot then, too.  ) |
| I believe that it is not only our right to voice our dissent, but our duty to question our leaders when they've embarked upon a course that we cannot support.
Should we abandon our freedom of speech, one of the very rights we enjoy stated directly in our Constitution, so others can't use it as propaganda? That just gives a free pass to those in power to do what they like, free of criticism, and we can see where that has gotten us. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. When no one is allowed to question the decisions of an administration, we all lose. I'll get off my soapbox now. 
Laurie |
Oscar's Mom wrote: I believe that it is not only our right to voice our dissent, but our duty to question our leaders when they've embarked upon a course that we cannot support.
Should we abandon our freedom of speech, one of the very rights we enjoy stated directly in our Constitution, so others can't use it as propaganda? That just gives a free pass to those in power to do what they like, free of criticism, and we can see where that has gotten us. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. When no one is allowed to question the decisions of an administration, we all lose. <Wild Applause for Laurie>  |
| As an aside, for every soldier who has a video in defense of this war, there's another with a video against. They're easy enough to find on YouTube or Google.
The only war I am in support of is the one in Afghanistan. Iraq - no. But that certainly does not mean that I don't appreciate our soldiers for carrying out their orders. |
Please don't get off your soapbox, I like the company up here! 
Yes, I think it is our duty to speak out when we disagree when it is warranted. Let me give an absurd example to illustrate what I mean. Suppose the Commander in Chief had been caught having an affair in the Oval Office with a member of Congress in the middle of a war. Let's say this Chief Executive then bounced a check for the White House Cable TV bill, and had failed to include a $10,000 investment in a Real Estate development company in his public ethics disclosure. Should the opposition party impeach the President during the war? Up until the point when the President "pulls the trigger" on a war any opposition should be fierce!!! At the moment when the bullets start flying, unless the dissension is about the methods of the prosecution of the war, I feel outspoken opposition should be carefully considered. While we were dealing with the beginnings of the insurgency, the opposition started to make loud waves. In my opinion this emboldened Iran and gave them the intestinal fortitude to send fighters and weapons into Iraq to further foment the insurgency. It almost certainly cost lives in the short run, and who knows whether or not it cost lives in the long run (nobody can know) by increasing the success of the insurgency. Perhaps it saved lives by waking up the President to make changes. Again, who knows. Was it worth it at the time? Who knows? If Howard Dean and others had remained quiet, would the insurgency still have happened and been as successful? Who knows? We were in the midst of battle; did he/they think we would withdraw because of the criticisms, saying "this is a mistake" over and over while we were fighting? Is constantly attacking the reasons for going to war appropriate while we are in it? Does it always have to be about the politics? There are many more issues to cover and I could drone on and on. I think the criticisms did good when it became clear that the prosecution of the counter-insurgency was not going well. Political posturing and opposition to "the surge" was appropriate. There were other good times to be speaking out. I don't think people should be censored, but I do feel that at times wisdom should temper our own free speech. |
Quote: In my opinion this emboldened Iran and gave them the intestinal fortitude to send fighters and weapons into Iraq to further foment the insurgency.
To be completely honest, I don't believe that dissent in the U.S. emboldened Iran in any way. I think it marginally fed into their propaganda but my opinion is that Iran would have acted the same--and had been doing so for some time. |
rdf wrote: As an aside, for every soldier who has a video in defense of this war, there's another with a video against. They're easy enough to find on YouTube or Google.
The only war I am in support of is the one in Afghanistan. Iraq - no. But that certainly does not mean that I don't appreciate our soldiers for carrying out their orders. well said - and just like every other group in society not all soldiers motives are pure. I certainly would question the motives of anyone in making a political statement. but then again I am a boomer and I believe questioning authority is in my blood  |
| I don't think any of us will support 100% any one man or woman to lead this great country...such a person doesn't exist. Our country was based on democracy that would not allow any one person dictate what we would do. Why then do we blame Bush for everything? After 9-11 he was a hero with the highest approval rating..how soon we forget. As he leaves office I do credit him with the fact we haven't had another 9-11 but in doing so he has taken the heat. Congress is in the position to CHANGE the way we live and only Congress. They have the lowest approval rating and yet the democrats lead...We really live in a "me" generation presently...my problems are because of others. My husband and I take responsibility for our financial situation, what we buy and don't, how we choose to live..alot of our economic pbs. are because people took credit given easily when they KNEW they couldn't afford it and now they are crying. Who is responsible? I taught 30 yrs. trying to tell my students they were responsible for choices, yet adults don't want to take responsibility either. This is the greatest country, we live better than most in the world, we have far more opportunity to live our life anyway we choose..the key word is choice. I will vote this election for someone who will work with others, lead and look close at who I vote in the senate and congress. Our choices aren't my first choice but I pray whoever wins will want and do the best for America. It does bother me that a canidate has to be a celebrity today to get elected..technology and media has changed our world! Sorry so long, as a person who served as an officer in the USAF and a wife of a retired USAF officer I love my country and think it's the best in the world and our leaders could do a better job if they didn't have to worry about the approval ratings from such a diverse population of "me" people. |
Didn't find exactly what you're looking for? Search again here:
Custom Search
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|