« Code Blue Alert Part III -- Stuck in the Middle | Main | What Does "Supporting the Troops" Mean? »
So Very Wrong, in So Very Many Ways
While the politicians are pandering, and the spinbots are shouting, and every monkey in a red-white-and-blue suit is screeching "I support the troops! We support the troops!"... the torn and tattered veterans of the neocons' illegal and immoral war for conquest in the Middle East are being warehoused in Washington in conditions that most Americans would never even dream of letting their house pets live in, let alone their wounded warriors.
Behind the door of Army Spec. Jeremy Duncan's room, part of the wall is torn and hangs in the air, weighted down with black mold. When the wounded combat engineer stands in his shower and looks up, he can see the bathtub on the floor above through a rotted hole. The entire building, constructed between the world wars, often smells like greasy carry-out. Signs of neglect are everywhere: mouse droppings, belly-up cockroaches, stained carpets, cheap mattresses.
This is the world of Building 18, not the kind of place where Duncan expected to recover when he was evacuated to Walter Reed Army Medical Center from Iraq last February with a broken neck and a shredded left ear, nearly dead from blood loss. But the old lodge, just outside the gates of the hospital and five miles up the road from the White House, has housed hundreds of maimed soldiers recuperating from injuries suffered in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Walter Reed Army Medical Center is supposed to be this country's flagship facility for taking care of those who have almost but not quite died in the service of their country. So why in the name of all that's holy are the much-vaunted support-the-troopers leaving them to rot in conditions that the most timid ASPCA officials would scream about if they were they to learn that cats and dogs were being held in such despicable conditions in some animal shelter someplace?
The common perception of Walter Reed is of a surgical hospital that shines as the crown jewel of military medicine. But 5 1/2 years of sustained combat have transformed the venerable 113-acre institution into something else entirely -- a holding ground for physically and psychologically damaged outpatients. Almost 700 of them -- the majority soldiers, with some Marines -- have been released from hospital beds but still need treatment or are awaiting bureaucratic decisions before being discharged or returned to active duty.
They suffer from brain injuries, severed arms and legs, organ and back damage, and various degrees of post-traumatic stress. Their legions have grown so exponentially -- they outnumber hospital patients at Walter Reed 17 to 1 -- that they take up every available bed on post and spill into dozens of nearby hotels and apartments leased by the Army. The average stay is 10 months, but some have been stuck there for as long as two years.
This is just so many kinds of wrong, in so very many ways. The Washington Post has a shock-inducing article about the WRAMC on its website today that can, and certainly should, make you mad as hell so you you're not going to take it any more. It's way too long to quote here in detail, but please go to their website and read their Walter Reed story asap. (Fair warning: your blood pressure will go up at least 20 points by the end of the article, I guarantee.)
While the hospital is a place of scrubbed-down order and daily miracles, with medical advances saving more soldiers than ever, the outpatients in the Other Walter Reed encounter a messy bureaucratic battlefield nearly as chaotic as the real battlefields they faced overseas.
On the worst days, soldiers say they feel like they are living a chapter of "Catch-22." The wounded manage other wounded. Soldiers dealing with psychological disorders of their own have been put in charge of others at risk of suicide.
Disengaged clerks, unqualified platoon sergeants and overworked case managers fumble with simple needs: feeding soldiers' families who are close to poverty, replacing a uniform ripped off by medics in the desert sand or helping a brain-damaged soldier remember his next appointment.
"We've done our duty. We fought the war. We came home wounded. Fine. But whoever the people are back here who are supposed to give us the easy transition should be doing it," said Marine Sgt. Ryan Groves, 26, an amputee who lived at Walter Reed for 16 months. "We don't know what to do. The people who are supposed to know don't have the answers. It's a nonstop process of stalling."
Then call your Congresscritters about it, fax your local media outlets about it, spam your buddy lists about it, shout on every blog and myspacebook page you can find about it, holler and raise hell and bang pots and pans on every street corner about it -- do whatever it takes to get the word out about this tragic travesty of so-called supporting the troops in every corner of the land.
"I hate it," said Romero, who stays in his room all day. "There are cockroaches. The elevator doesn't work. The garage door doesn't work. Sometimes there's no heat, no water. ... I told my platoon sergeant I want to leave. I told the town hall meeting. I talked to the doctors and medical staff. They just said you kind of got to get used to the outside world. ... My platoon sergeant said, 'Suck it up!' "
That's right, kid. Suck it up. Tell it to the Marines. Because the politicians sure as hell ain't listening.
This world is invisible to outsiders. Walter Reed occasionally showcases the heroism of these wounded soldiers and emphasizes that all is well under the circumstances. President Bush, former defense secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and members of Congress have promised the best care during their regular visits to the hospital's spit-polished amputee unit, Ward 57.
"We owe them all we can give them," Bush said during his last visit, a few days before Christmas. "Not only for when they're in harm's way, but when they come home to help them adjust if they have wounds, or help them adjust after their time in service."
This is pure and unadulterated cowflop, people, and all the self-serving political hacks wrapping themselves in the flag and hiding behind their right-wing rhetoric and their phony support-the-troops photo ops can't possibly be allowed to get away with it any more.
It's our turn to support the troops now. So get on out there and raise hell, DCP readers. They should never have had to be there, but they were there anyway, and now they're getting treated like unwanted pets that we have to hide from the public eye.
And that is just so very wrong, in so very many ways.
Note to politicians running for office in '08 and to Congress Critters now in office:
If you can't get rid of the skeletons in your closet, you'd best teach them to dance.
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950, Nobel Prize for Literature: 1925)
'Fess up to the fact that you were WRONG to vote in favor of a war that any person with an IQ above a rock knew should not have been started in the first place by that moronic cretin who got his office from a SCOTUS decision in 2000. 'Fess up to the fact that the collective body of Congress bought into the LIES of that ignorant boob, that you, and you alone, could have stopped him with just a few in-depth questions about why he wanted to divert troops to Iraq in the first place. Don't go shoving it off on 'wrong war, wrong time!' That's a load of bu!!$h!te and we all know it. That war based on LIES for oil should never have been allowed to happen, and most of us knew that FACT from the get-go. It's only you and Lamestream Media who beat the drums for war so loudly that saner voices were drowned out. You've all known for years now that the entire war is an unjustified war crime, and yet you've sat on your arses for years and done nothing to change the status quo. How many more have to die for LIES so US oil corporations can make more record profits? How much more money are you willing to throw into the black abyss?
The best way we can 'support the troops' is to bring them HOME NOW! As in, put the guard and reserve troops on the next military transport planes out of Iraq and Afghanistan NOW, and redeploy the regular troops out of the crossfire of the civil war in Iraq within the next two to three months (that's the extent I'm willing to grant a "phased withdrawal"). We do not understand the reason for their civil war; there certainly is no good reason for our people to die in their civil war.
There is no way possible any of you can justify Georgie's war any longer. You have the power to repeal both AUMF's; you have the power to repeal MCA '06 in its entirety; you have the power to repeal the Patriot Acts; you have the power to repeal the stupid amendments to FISA; you have the power to stop torture, close Gitmo, and release the prisoners who have never been charged with any crimes, and you have the power to un-do all the harm that's been done with other bad legislation shoved through your chambers at record speed in the last few years at Georgie's behest for 'up or down votes.' The US Constitution grants you the power of the purse to deny funding for wars: USE IT!
If you must throw good money after bad, pay for brain transplants for the neoCons who refuse to see reason.... We cannot endure two more years of this war crime to continue...!
We will not stand for you wasting more time on NON-binding resolutions, since that only means more people will die. Put some teeth into your words, and DO SOMETHING!
Now, can we reasonably talk about IMPEACHING the bam dastards who got us into this mess (with Lamestream Media's help, and with your ignorant help) in the first danged place...?
If you can't sense from your emails and phone calls that your constituents are seething in anger out here, screaming for you to end this insanity, then you just aren't paying attention....
This is all quite terrible:
QUOTE:
I would never vote for Nader. I sued Nader for holding a fake nominating convention & I lost. He gathered petitions on street corners on seven different occasions & locations - then lumped them together as part of his "nominating convention" - quite illegal. But the Republican Secretary of State here sided with him and our case was thrown out.
Posted by: not my president at February 18, 2007 12:30 AM
I would never vote for Nader.
Posted by: not my president at February 18, 2007 12:30 AM
I'm with you there.
Posted by: Ally McRepuke at February 18, 2007 12:40 AM
@@@@@
I don't like Nader either or trust him. I half-wish that the Greens would finally get serious and actually NOMINATE someone for president PROPERLY AND DEMOCRATICALLY and this person be more credible than the perennial loser Nader. Nader seems to be on his quadrennial, quixotic ego trip.
But how else does someone show their complete disgust with the Democratic party than voting Green - or worse - voting Republican...???
Hillary Clinton - no matter what she does in the next 20 odd months - voted in favor of the authorization of force, voted in favor of the Patriot Act and continued to support the war right up to the 2006 election. SHE IS NOT A LEADER... SHE IS A CALCULATING POLITICIAN...
Right on, Rick Albertson! Thank you thank you thank you!
Alan Castle in Seattle sent the story out to about a hundred people, many of whom actually work at the VA. Bert in Mpls posted it at Vets for Peace Yahoo group that we have. I'll send it to all my email lists, and most of them have lists. I'm sure people all over the country will read this article today and react, because it's so powerful. We need to increase the effect.
Astrobuff in OR proceeded with her idea, which may or may not happen but maybe it'll make the point.Here is what she did, and I'll put it on our blog after this (Kayakbiker & Slugbug at http://www.silencedmajority.blogs.com)
To:
The big dogs at Daily Kos, TPM, Mydd, Crooks and Liars, My Left Wing, Booman Tribune, Democratic Underground, Eschaton, AmericaBlog, FireDogLake, The Next Hurrah, Informed Comment, TruthOut (and any other lefty/activist blog we can think of)
Re: WaPo article by Dana Priest entitled, “Soldiers Face Neglect, Frustration at Army’s Top Medical Facility.” February 18, 2007, A01. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/17/AR2007021701172.html
Hello:
I was reading about this article on the Daily Kos, and one person made a brilliant comment. He said that Markos should remove all diaries for 24 hours and solely have one posting on the site: this article.
Imagine the impact of having this as the centerpiece and conducting a blackout on everything else. For one full day. It would start a buzz for sure. Then imagine if every blog community who is concerned about the treatment of our injured soldiers were to do the same thing, at the same time. A moment of total focus. And see where it goes. Our soldiers deserve nothing less. We each have a day to devote to them, don’t we?
Now, some boards that receive this message, may not have the traffic that would warrant a blackout on everything but this story, but a prominent call out to visit the larger boards (like dem underground and daily kos) on that day would be undeniably helpful with this action. I imagine some congress critter going to Daily Kos with his/her latest ‘posting to the people’ and finding a black out on everything BUT our wounded vets. I envision quite a buzz in the hall of Congress. Indeed.
Another person suggested getting a copyright waiver from the WaPo so we could post the entire article. That is an excellent idea. I checked pricing for for-profit internet sites to post this article. It is merely $145. That’s for a month, but maybe it would be cheaper to use it for just one day.
Please consider this idea. I am sure that you big dogs probably have email correspondences, and maybe you could talk about doing this in synch.
Personally, I believe that if we could get the nation to focus on just this one atrocious issue, then the activation of the masses on the government to fix this problem asap might just lead to a movement that could very well put the brakes on this war, and any new future wars that the neocons have in mind presently.
Please consider this.
Ralpheh
I agree (about the Greens). I wish they could be a viable party in this country, like they are in Europe. They at least have Green candidates in office and as part of coalitions. What they represent is good. The monolithic parties and stacked electoral and voting systems, not to mention media in this country sort of make Greens and other third parties so marginalized that they turn out to be/look like wackos, spoilers, or are not an option.
It also contributes to sprawling, spread-out Dem and Repub parties which try to encompass everyone and it all seems like a business. Describing H Clinton as a conniving politician vs a leader describes quite a few of them, as they essentially have to buy their way in. If someone isn't quite rich or doesn't have rich backers, it's getting to be almost impossible for them to get into office. Someone like Obama has to hang with the DLC as well as the DNC some and court Hollywood (our royalty). It gets quite tiresome.
My style is not to diss Dems on-line but believe me, I've voted since 1974, I think, and the whole thing has been less than optimal, to say the least. My really enthusiastic participation in the process was for Eugene McCarthy in 1968 when I was a teen, and even then it had a very sad ending. Four years later, same with McGovern (age 20, drinking on election night while underage, frustrated and disillusioned in Sx Falls, SD).
I guess we need to keep pulling the Dems our way as our counterweights on the right will not stop pulling their candidates. If only someone in the middle can win, we need to pull the middle over some to the side of the people not big business/warmongers.
I completely agree with this blogger's analysis of HIllary:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Clinton campaign is doomed. The fun thing is, some of her supporters are already starting to realize it.
They allege that "Hillary has long supported phased redeployment" Really - with a quote from JANUARY!?!? How telling.
Hillaristi: Help me out here. No one I know that supports Sen. Clinton has said in simple, non-Senate-ese, non-pre-tested language WHY she is running. Why vote for her? Where's the simple rationale? Not Quite As Bad On Iraq As The Republicans? Knows How To Craft A Healthcare Plan Certain Not To Pass? Not As Likely As Bill To Fool Around With Interns?
Sen. Obama has made it crystal clear why he's running. His candidacy's theme is easy to understand.
All I know from listening to Sen. Clinton is that she has:
No charisma.
No authenticity.
No leadership.
No rationale.
Always and only her own self-interest at heart.
Loads of friends in DC and the MSM.
People take their Presidential choices very personally. At some point you have to win over some actual voters. They don't all have to love you but they do have to like you enough to trust you with their vote. This is why Dean (who I went to war for) lost, also why Kerry lost, and why Obama will win.
As for actually BEING President, these same appealing qualities that Obama has and Hillary does not - and that her supporters want to dismiss as shallow or unimportant ARE the kinds of things that are important in the interpersonal relationships with other world leaders. Authenticity matters, and no one is better at sniffing it out in a major political leader than other major political leaders. That the PM of Australia already knows it - and feels he should therefore take a shot at it - underscores this.
Check the cell phone logs of her mid-level staffers recently? They're calling friends in the Obama campaign angling for a parachute. Barack is for real, and he's for real on Iraq, both the press and the voters are realizing it, and these things are driving Clinton staffers bonkers right about now.
Posted by: Eric Davis | February 16, 2007 11:02 AM
ralpheh:
I respectfully disagree with Eric Davis, and with your seconding his emotions.
Mr. Obama is charming as all get-out, yes. But he has a razor-thin track record of doing anything worthwhile, both in the Senate and back home in Illinois, and when you try to parse out all his fancy rhetoricizing you end up with practically nothing. He triangulates just as safely and just as self-servingly as Mrs. Clinton (who, um, I also do not like much either) except he does it in more flowery language. Mr. Obama has no more stones than she does, but he has much less experience to (not) back up his lack of stones with. This is a sad, sad thing.
I don't know much about Obama but I do know Hillary Clinton.
She Is Doomed - if she manages to win the Dem. nomination in 2008, she will lose the general election. She is unelectable. The South, already repulsed by her husband and Kerry, will run to the open arms of the waiting Republican candidate. The peace/ anti-war groups Will Not support Hillary because of her lousy voting record and lack of leadership in the Senate. Many of these folks will either not bother to vote at all or will vote 3rd party in protest.
So you don't like Obama... who is your candidate?
An Obama speech on the eve of war in Iraq:
Iraq Speech
by Barack Obama
Delivered on 26 October 2002.
Good afternoon. Let me begin by saying that although this has been billed as an anti-war rally, I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances.
The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union, and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil.
I don’t oppose all wars.
My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton’s army. He saw the dead and dying across the fields of Europe; he heard the stories of fellow troops who first entered Auschwitz and Treblinka. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil, and he did not fight in vain.
I don’t oppose all wars.
After September 11th, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this Administration’s pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again.
I don’t oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.
What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income – to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.
That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.
Now let me be clear – I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.
He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.
But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.
I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.
I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.
So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president today. You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.
You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure that the UN inspectors can do their work, and that we vigorously enforce a non-proliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.
You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.
You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, through an energy policy that doesn’t simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.
Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair.
The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not – we will not – travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain.
Ralpheh, why do you seem to assume that I must have some other candidate before I can be unimpressed by Obama?
I just got back from a peace surge.
(Few people showed up but lots of horns honking and thumbs up!)
Posted by: not my president at February 18, 2007 10:38 AM
I think it's a good idea and a reasonable plan.
Thanks, Rick, for a great thread.
I, for one, while knowing the vets were not being treated fairly, had NO IDEA about these conditions and this treatment.
It is obscene. And the thugs who are waiving the flag about supporting our troops should be strung up. The hubris of these people makes me ill.
I am sitting in the Detroit airport after a very good meeting about the movement work, and after a lovely time at sparrow's house. I am feeling quite ill over the Walter Reed situation.
Thinking, thinking....
Anyone in this creative community have a good idea about responding to this latest piece of crapola?
Just paid a whole bunch in taxes - to the feds and the county.
Now I expect really good roads, schools, health care and the war needs to stop now.
Karen
I am waiting to see if Astrobuff will get any responses to her queries as she emailed directly to the heads of the big blogs, which was impossible in the case of Markos Moulitzas, so she went on site.
I think we should each do as many things as we can think of simultaneously. I wrote to alot of smaller blogs and big email lists and she suggested Freeper and evangelical sites. I said to head for Vet advocates and also the young, such as Youth Against War and Racism, since they're cannon fodder.
Ralpheh
I like Obama.
I don't have a candidate and I don't plan to yet.
Ralpheh
There are those who will say Barack rhymes with Iraq, Hussein was Saddam's last name and Obama rhymes with Osama plus the man is part black and smokes.
I am reading his speeches and he has some real plus qualities and is attracting some good support and good people. Some of my best friends support him here and i may too. My son does. That said, on actual policies the three main candidates are not that different.
http://www.ontheissues.org
It's your choice to pick a candidate rally for him and diss the others. It's not necessary for everyone to do this yet or ever.
Also, Hillary Clinton is not unelectable. Her husband won and his VP would have too had there not been cheating in Florida and a rigged Supreme Court. That said, I did not work or donate for either of them, as they did not excite me and I didn't at the time realize how nefarious the neocons were becoming. I was not aware enough of the sinister qualities of Lee Atwater and Newt Gingrich and that PNAC was being developed.
We all spend alot of time on the progressive blogosphere but we do not have influence with corporate CEOs, generals or big lobbyists. We are small potatoes, even collectively. That does not mean we should do nothing but saying Hillary is polarizing or unelectable is parroting of a rightwing cliche.
I don't want her to get the nomination but you can't prove she is less electable than the others just by reading things on the internet that you agree with.
Ralpheh
"Loads of friends in DC and the MSM."
& unelectable?
We will judge that later.
I don't want her to get the nomination but you can't prove she is less electable than the others just by reading things on the internet that you agree with.
Posted by: not my president at February 18, 2007 01:58 PM
Exactly. And NMP knows from experience, believe me!
I cannot believe how much I know about insider politics in DC that I wish I did not know. I wish I could go back to innocent lefty-ism.
And it isn't the candidates I get upset with--it's the CULTURE--it's corrupt and nasty and I don't want to play in it. I miss my idealistic view of the electoral process.
I want participatory democracy back.
Here Nyc Alberts has come through with blogswarming.
He opens with his own poetics and graphics, so this is a warning (it has an impact) - then he follows with the story. He is also an ex-Marine who has been in the middle east before, blogging from New York City. He'd appreciate if you pass it on.
http://apenwarmedinhell.blogspot.com/2007/02/our-neglected-vets-real-scandal.html
Astrobuff tells me that TestVet has come through at DailyKos.
Someone should get a bunch of copies of this and hand it out in front of recruiting stations.
Our blog got this comment:
Pretty ugly, and the 2008 budget cut VA funds, I believe.
How about killing SDI and some other high-priced useless projects, taking half the savings and fund vets' care, and take half and redistribute into the rest of the economy, through spending in much-needed areas or targeted tax cuts?
But increasing the DoD budget in a blanket sense, as Obama has indicated, will do nothing but fill our VA system with yet more people broken in body and soul, while sucking funds out of our rapidly disintegrating economy.
I may end up voting for Obama (or even Hillary), but it's a sad commentary that no one can even approach the nomination in either party without kowtowing to the M-I complex and the Israel lobbies. Hard to tell the two apart, actually.
Posted by: karen at February 18, 2007 02:05 PM
Karen, if you're still in the airport & you're near a newstand that sells Vanity Fair, check out page 338 of the March issue.
Here is the DailyKos diary to read, comment, recommend
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/2/17/203419/567
(Treatment of vets at Walter Reed)
Just went over to http://www.upper-left.blogspot.com and left Shaun Dale a long comment to make sure he knew - he's a Vietnam Vet.
Found this interesting comment on there, to share:
Speaking of AmericaBlog…
…you saw this, right?
1) Over 90% of of the attacks that are killing U.S soldiers in Iraq are SUNNI inspired. They are, like, a whole different group of people than the Shia, Mr. Bush. And supported by your three-minutes-in-the-closet friends and financial benefactors the Saudis.
2) 15 of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia, not Iran.
3) Bin Laden - yeah, Saudi not Iranian (and still at large, why is that?).
4) Say 'hi' to Bandar Bush for us.
5) Saudi Arabia, not Iran, was one of the three countries that recognized the Taliban-led government in Afghanistan--yeah that one.
6) Tell you brother to lay off the Thai hookers.
7) Saudi Arabia sought nuclear weapons, and may still be doing so.
Well, now you have.
Shaun goes on:
I think some of the current crop of contenders would do well to emulate John Kerry's direct confrontation with the problematic U.S.-Saudi relationship. When Kerry would point a finger at Saudi Arabia it often produced some of the most enthusiastic applause of his appearances (and yes, by the way, people mostly laughed at his jokes, too).
It's something people seem to find easy to understand when it's plainly stated. Profitable Bush family investments don't neccessarily equate to benefial American alliances.
Creative ideas? I was just presented with one. If a bunch of bloggers would show a graphic image each day - a different one - of war and what happens - maybe people would wake up.
& the Coulters and Malkins of the world might think twice if their mailboxes were flooded with carnage - since they get off on it - but make it so when they said "Support the Troops" they'd finally choke on their words
wow
Astrobuff heard from Mary Scott O'Connor and she is game to black out everything but this story today on her blog, if she can figure out how technically.
Every one in the United States and world needs to read this.
Call me unrealistic. It would be a good thing to be read publicly in front of courthouses, etc.
Last sentence reports on who was on the Sunday chat shows.
Article roughs out what alternative Dems and concerned Reps have in limiting 2002 Authorization to go to war - what sorts of thing can be done - if anything. What is constitutional? What can Bush veto? What impinges on his rights as Commander in Chief and what rights is he / has he impinged on?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6424425,00.html
A voter's protest choice next year might not be Nader. The Unity '08 people plan on running a bi-partisan ticket, and it might well draw significant votes from the middle - as Perot did in '92 and '96. How that factors in to the General Election dynamic is impossible to know at this point. But it might point to a candidate farther to the left being viable this time.
As for Hillary, I would be astonished if she won the nomination, truly astonished. She's wrong on a wide variety of issues that likely Democratic primary voters care about - like Fair Trade, the value of Congressional oversight, and support for the war. All she has going for her at this point is her relationship to Bill, her humongous campaign chest, and the sympathy of those Democrats who remain incensed over the '90s investigations.
I refused to vote for her this time around in either the Senatorial primary or the general election - choosing to cast my vote for Jonathan Tasini (in the primary) and the Green Party candidate in the general election.
On the morning that George Bush launched this war, New York City was 51%-49% against, but Hillary Clinton chose to insult the intelligence of constituents who simply knew better than she did, than Bill did, and the rest of the bloody Clintonistas did. We have chickenhawks on the left and chickenhawks on the right - and I can't abide either variety one bit.
Matthew,
I would not be astonished at all. Many states allow Republicans to vote in Democratic primaries or visa versa. I believe if she wins it's because the Republicans GOTV for her.
GlobalVillage strikes again, this time on the craven canardism of the wingnuts claiming to 'support the troops': http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Mnm-w3Fv4s
Posted by: Otter at February 18, 2007 03:51 PM
War and its ripple effects and ramifications threaten our safety and security... and you are feeling the tug of self-preservation, the adrenalin rush of fight or flight.
At least that's how I feel. We've been under the burdens of unjustified lies and illegal war and more immoral lies and illegal torture (and threats of more war crimes based on lies in the future) for so many years, it's sometimes now difficult for me to remember when we had peace.
I heard about the helicopter crash in Afghanistan yesterday and my heart dropped to the floor. My youngest nephew is due home the beginning of March, and I'm no longer sure where he is in Afghanistan. The knot in my stomach refuses to budge, and it will likely stay that way until a few days have passed and/or when I hear who died.
We should not be called upon to have to suffer these feelings because of the lies of The Cretin and his clutch of moronic chickenhawks. Worse, our young people should not be asked to fight and die for lies and oil.
May the Goddess Hel reserve the worst spot in her frozen domain for the criminals who have been leading this country since that misbegotten SCOTUS decision, and for those who have supported those criminals. May they be damned for all eternity for the traitors they are....
American Betrayal
By David Michael Green
Surely the hottest place in Hell is being reserved for Colin Powell, who not only violated all his experience, principles, honor and reputation by failing to speak out against the war, but in fact sold that war to a then-skeptical American public by means of his United Nations exhibition in political pornography.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article17105.htm
Excerpts:
What is it about George W. Bush that causes grown men like Powell, Ford and the rest to mortgage a lifetime’s achievement for the benefit of this little Caligula, this meritocratic caveat, this dynastic disaster?
~~~~~
A strategically placed voice of reason from a trusted figure here or there could have stopped this madness a lot earlier, or at least lessened the magnitude of its severity. That didn’t happen, though, and I can’t think of a time in American history so deserving of shame. If future generations don’t think of us in the worst of terms, it will only be because of our sheer dumb luck.
But, given that we’ve gluttonously consumed several generations’ worth of luck already, that doesn’t seem likely. Expect your children and grandchildren to be very, very angry at you. Expect them to ask why they should be going broke paying their share of taxes, plus your share, plus interest on yours, and getting only a disastrous war and a massively enriched American plutocracy in exchange. Expect them to ask why the planet we live on is screaming in pain and we knowingly let that happen back when it could have been stopped. Expect them to ask why we stood by and allowed an arrogant, stupid and lethal foreign policy make the whole world come to hate them, when it wasn’t actually coming to kill them.
With so little courage on display these last years, perhaps we did in fact get the government we deserved.
But they didn’t.
Business As Usual
By Irene Rheinwald
Empire building, the consequence of self-delusion, arrogance, and xenophobia, is actually economic exploitation. The spoils of war are paramount: not democracy, not enlightenment, nor freedom, liberty, and certainly not self-determination. To assert such lofty motives is disingenuous dissembling. Why is the United States only interested in “liberating” countries swimming in natural resources such as oil?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article17101.htm
Frank Rich | Oh What a Malleable War
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/021807E.shtml
Frank Rich writes: "Maybe the Bush White House can't conduct a war, but no one has ever impugned its ability to lie about its conduct of a war. Now even that well-earned reputation for flawless fictionalizing is coming undone. Watching the administration try to get its story straight about Iran's role in Iraq last week was like watching third graders try to sidestep blame for misbehaving while the substitute teacher was on a bathroom break. The team that once sold the country smoking guns in the shape of mushroom clouds has completely lost its mojo. Surely these guys can do better than this."
Save the Earth... it's the only planet with chocolate.
And while I was at it, I also re-stumbled across a video montage that our friend GlobalVillage posted a few weeks ago on YouTube, and it's not only still wrenchingly effective but it's also entirely apropos to the subject of this thread as well...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgjW7o3mb1A
Ralpheh
"Loads of friends in DC and the MSM."
& unelectable?
We will judge that later.
Posted by: not my president at February 18, 2007 02:00 PM
@@@@@@@
MONICA
"I didn't have sex with that woman."
Husband is a draft-dodger/ sexual predator etc..
Rose Law Firm billing records
"I don't sit around baking cookies." etc...
"Saddam is a threat with biological and chemical weapons."
Voted for the war and the Patriot Act.
BTW: do you remember what happened at the post 9-11 charity concert in New York City for the victims, the fire-fighters and the policemen?
Hillary was booed by her New York audience...
One can only take so much abuse and insults from the national Dem. party.
Posted by: Ralpheh at February 17, 2007 10:14 PM
Not just the nationals, but the state-level parties too.
Texas Democrats no longer believe in antidiscrimination laws.
California Democrats have completely written off Los Angeles and San Diego suburbs, the motorists, and the sportsmen. They surely no longer represent me - and certainly have no interest in doing so.
Posted by: Ally McRepuke at February 18, 2007 12:47 AM
@@@@@@@
My state Democratic party in Michigan is both corrupt and incompetent. There is cronyism and nepotism throughout the state party. As for incompetence, in the Democratic tide of voters that swept the country in 2006, the Michigan Democratic party was not able to pick up a single congressional seat held by the Republicans. Much of this had to do with a complete lack of financial support to the Dem. challengers but it also had to do with laziness, disinterest and incompetence by the state party with the congressional races.
The state party is holding its annual convention next weekend. I would only go to attend the Bloggers Caucus.
Interesting comments to read. I predict there will not be very good unity among either party because there are too many polarizing issues, too many candidates, no incumbent in either party, and alot of people seem to have no where to turn. They can support corrupt candidates with big war chestts or try for something else. It sounds very frustrating and it's not much consolation but US is not the only country where this is happening. Try talking to Brits and Europeans about some of their recent and upcoming elections. France has a doozy coming up, for example: Royal, Sarkozy, Le Pen. I don't envy them either.
Astrobuff has heard from another Blog Big Dog:
John Aravosis is going to TOWN on the wapo story. Don't miss his article about how the AP is calling the problem nothing more than slow paperwork (ba$tard$).
http://americablog.blogspot.com/
Astrobuff sent the word to a YouTuber from Global Village. She is not giving up and neither are we.
Her note to the YouTuber:
Hey, I just watched your video on the DC protest with McWorm's music. Really moving stuff! I am working with others on creating a blogswarm re a WaPo article on the atrocious conditions at Walter Reed. I have send a request for some big blogs to black out all diaries and messages for 24 hours -- except the wapo article. Not sure that it will happen. But the internet is passing the wapo story around at a fast rate. Here is the article if you haven't seen it:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/17/AR2007021701172.html
Pls read the whole thing! It takes you on a bleak journey of what our wounded vets are dealing with.
Anyways, we thought a youtube video that recited many parts of the article would be productive. Someone at dem underground posted your mcworm video in a thread on the article, and I thought....would it be too much to ask if you might be interested in putting something together? Your stuff is great; you have a following on YouTube, and you are very much committed to ending this illegal, wanton war.
Btw, you are in Eugene; I am in Bend, OR (Howdy neighbor!)
Sidenote: We really need to get the clue out to the lefty blogosphere that one can get a video on the 'most discussed' list easily simply by COMMENTING. We lefties pass links from youtube around day and night, but the comments are few and far between. If we could say "watch this video, and make sure to comment, so we it gets more exposure in the general youtube population," I think we could get the truth out there more. Just my petpeeve that the lefties haven't figured out that little 'marketing' angle for YouTube. Oh well.
Re DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND
Nice! Someone from DCP got blogswarm issue on DU's greatest page
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x240203
Excellent! Thing is... while we post these things to these boards.... the owners of the boards have also received my letter. Maybe they will think about a black out.
Alot of people are emailing the story to key congress critters, Olbermann, their vets groups, etc etc. I think it might take on a life of its own in a day or two....crossing my fingers.
It's weird, I can vividly recall the mounting revulsion I was feeling as I read page after page of the wapo article...... The article is written in a very moving way. You just get to the end and say, OMG.....I can't take it any longer. That's why the key to this thing is to get people to read the entire article. The article takes you on a very bleak journey.
Dems Eye Limiting '02 War Authorization
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/02/18/national/w150617S49.DTL&type=politics
Senate Democrats pledged renewed efforts Sunday to curtail the Iraq war, suggesting they will seek to limit a 2002 measure authorizing President Bush's use of force against Saddam Hussein.
The top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said the proposal had little chance of succeeding. "I think the president would veto it and the veto would be upheld," said Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana.
A day after Republicans foiled a Democratic bid to repudiate Bush's deployment of 21,500 additional combat troops to Iraq, Senate Democrats declined to embrace measures — being advanced in the House — that would attach conditions to additional funding for troops...
NMP, your friend Astrobuff probably already knows this by now, but GlobalVillage (aka GV) put this YouTube video together earlier this afternoon also:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Mnm-w3Fv4
FWIW, GV hangs out on DU a lot but can always be found at http://blog.johnkerry.com/ also.
(Oh, and, um, er, the person who posted the story on the DU Greatest Page that was referred to in your comment directly above would be, ah, yr hmbl otr crspndnt. *blush*)
Posted by: NonnyO at February 18, 2007 04:39 PM
A woman with the right priorities. I think she deserves some good chocolate. Any recommendations, madame?
Just as an aside, and not to dampen the enthusiasm or anything, but the odds of blogowners -- particularly blogowners with very diversified high-traffic websites such as DU and dKos -- blacking out anything in favor of one particular story for 24 hours are essentially infinitesimal. That's not because they don't care about the given story, but it's a mighty huge internets and they can never afford to focus on only one thing to the exclusion of all others. It'd be a lot more realistic to ask them to make sure it's prominently featured on their top pages for 24 hours rather than to black out anything else for it.
Otter
Small World! Astrobuff said she liked your writing and she noticed the setadeadline petition and signed. These coincidences are a sign that this is working. Everyone keep propagating ideas and implementing them, having to do with making the story about maltreatment of the vets at Walter Reed be more prominent in the media. The story should not get brushed off, buried or spun and neither should the returning vets. My dad was a vet and I went into my field to work with head-injured vets (& others).
Nyc Alberts just updated his site to include the graphic photo a day idea, for blogs. Pretty extreme but might break some people's defenses. If you are offended by profanity and graphic images of wounded soldiers do not look at Nyc's site, but he is a vet and he is very offended by gratuitous wounding of soldiers when it will affect their whole life and happened because of a lie.
http://www.apenwarmedinhell.blogspot.com
Otter
I know that's true but I like to see someone try to make headway with a wild idea and if others are doing related wild ideas there might be some kind of Hundredth Monkey tipping point even though the internets is huge!
NMP:
Let's leave the whole Hundredth Monkey concept out of this, please. One Hundredth of a Hundred Monkeys is quite enough for us here, thankyouverymuch. But please do ask your buddy Astrobuff to drop me an email:
otter(at)democracycellproject.net
(Anybody else who wants to ping yr hmbl otr crspndnt, that's how to do it.)
Otter
I'll tell her.
You're right - a Hundred Monkeys would definitely drive up up the wall! & one Curious George is more than enough.
The Associated Press
NEW HAVEN, Conn. — More than one-fifth of 500 Connecticut National Guard soldiers of the 102nd Infantry serving in war zones are owed thousands of dollars in incentive pay that is months overdue.
The Assignment Incentive Pay of $1,000 a month is paid to Reserve or National Guard soldiers who volunteer to extend active duty beyond 24 months.
Lt. Col. John Whitford of the Connecticut National Guard confirmed that about 110 soldiers are owed amounts between $2,000 and $17,000. He attributed the delay to a “bureaucratic-administrative issue” at the federal level.
The 1st Battalion of the 102nd left Connecticut for Fort Bragg in January 2006 and for Afghanistan the following April ...
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/02/apconnguard070218 /
hat tip to Astrobuff herself
Jerome a Paris also likes Bill Richardson
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/2/18/165738/992
an outsider's view
I like Lori Barbato, who I had a major crush on in 8th grade, also. But that doesn't mean I want her to run for president.
Save the Earth... it's the only planet with chocolate.
Posted by: NonnyO at February 18, 2007 04:39 PM
I hear you.
(Just finished watching An Inconvenient Truth, btw, so it really rings true...)
Johny Depp for president - why not
If Reagan could do it -
Let's hear it for earth and chocolate! I'm in!
madame, I did not remember to look at Vanity Fair, but will try to pick one up! Thanks for the heads up.
I am working on the folks here in town to talk about what to do about the Walter Reed mess. Will have more manana...
"America is dumb, is something like a dumb puppy that has big teeth—that can bite and hurt you, aggressive." Johny Depp
My two cents:
I don't know anybody who likes Hillary. I dislike her and don't trust her. She comes across to me as opportunistic. I saw her voting to go in to Iraq, and even a year and a half later nodding her head in agreement during Pres. Bush's SOTU address and clapping about going in to Iraq. She cooked her goose on that one, IMHO.
I have already received emails from people showing Hillary wearing a Queen's robe and hat, looking like a witch with a wart on her chin.
Obama has already tap danced on something he should have been strong on in my opinion, a year or so ago.
Richardson can't take it (neither can Hillary - win the general election that is) - he had a hard time taking his own state. He is a nice guy and all that - but lacking the fire and charisma and strong impact needed to project strong leadership characteristics.
Hopefully, this will be the last time I will say this - I find it very distasteful to diss people in my party of choice. But I am disappointed in our prospects right now.
Governor Joe Manchin of West Virginia projects a very likeable, honest, humble and humane character. He is considered a moderate and is against abortion, but very much a Democrat and is well thought of. Here is a bit on him from Wikipedia - he is said to be possibly considering a run for the Presidency - I think he could take the general election on his personality alone.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Manchin
During the 2006 Sago Mine disaster of early January 2006, Manchin initially appeared to confirm reports that 12 miners had survived. These reports proved to be incorrect three hours later, when it was confirmed that only one miner survived the accident. In an early-morning press conference on January 4, Governor Manchin acknowledged that an unintentional miscommunication had occurred with rescue teams within the mine. Manchin stated that the incorrect information he received regarding the status of the miners was not received through official channels. He did not confirm the story, the press assumed he did. No one is aware how the story was confirmed.
Despite the Sago mine tragedy, it didn't injure his popularity; in fact, his handling of the matter may have enhanced it. In November 2006, SurveyUSA ranked him as one of the most popular governors in the country with a 74% approval rating.
We must save the earth. Chocolate truffles can make everything seem wonderful.
Julie in Portland writes:
"Someone should get a bunch of copies of this and hand it out in front of recruiting stations."
OMG. BINGO. That is it. Mass action at recruiting stations. Bingo, bingo, bingo.
and I bet a lot of soldiers who are have not either been injured or been shipped to the Middle East have no idea of what is waiting for them were they to be injured.
We need to get this article in the hands of every person considering enlistment and those who are enlisted but are still stateside.
Bingo. Kudos to Julie in Portland.
Hi "not my president".
You wrote: "Jerome a Paris also likes Bill Richardson"
Well, betcha dollars for donuts Jerome never lived in New Mexico. I spent 1/3 of my life there. And Richardson should not be president. IMO. Hell, the only reason this New England dude lives in NM is because it was the only place he could have reasonably been eletcted. He is a carpetbagger. Not unlike Bush Sr and Bush Jr with their faux Texas roots.
Richardson is driven by ambition, and ambition only. I want a statesperson. God, I pine for a statesperson in the white house. Ugh.
Goddess, astrobuff, I do too. The current chimpuppet-in-chief is a prime example of what can happen when citizens shirk their responsibility to actually use their vestigial brains and give a damn about what they see happening around them every day.
McCain says Roe v. Wade should be overturned
Presidential hopeful reaching out to GOP conservatives
SPARTANBURG, S.C. - Republican presidential candidate John McCain, looking to improve his standing with the party’s conservative voters, said Sunday the court decision that legalized abortion should be overturned.
“I do not support Roe versus Wade. It should be overturned,” the Arizona senator told about 800 people in South Carolina, one of the early voting states.
McCain also vowed that if elected, he would appoint judges who “strictly interpret the Constitution of the United States and do not legislate from the bench.”
The landmark 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade gave women the right to choose an abortion to terminate a pregnancy. The Supreme Court has narrowly upheld the decision, with the presence of an increasing number of more conservative justices on the court raising the possibility that abortion rights would be limited.
Social conservatives are a critical voting bloc in the GOP presidential primaries.
McCain’s campaign also announced early Sunday that he had been endorsed by former Oklahoma Gov. Frank Keating, who had been considering his own bid for the White House, and former Texas Sen. Phil Gramm, who failed in his bid for the Republican nomination in 1996.
Keating told the crowd that McCain is the “only candidate who is a true-blue, Ronald Reagan conservative.”
McCain later attended an evening rally promoting an abstinence program. He told the crowd of more than 1,000 teens and parents that young people have pressures far different from the ones he faced while growing up. “Sometimes I’ve made the wrong choice,” McCain said.
He also talked about his experience as a prisoner of war during Vietnam, and described some of the torture he suffered. His captors “wanted to make us do things that we otherwise wouldn’t do,” including confessing to war crimes, McCain said.
He and fellow prisoners were beat up for practicing their religion, but they continued to do it. “Sometimes it is very difficult to do the right thing,” he said.
McCain has strong name recognition and the largest network of supporters in South Carolina. That backing comes in part from his staunch support for the Iraq war, something on which he focused a day earlier in Iowa. But it’s the same state that dealt a crushing blow to his presidential aspirations in 2000.
McCain is trying to build support among conservatives after a recent rebuke from Christian leader James Dobson, who said he wouldn’t back McCain’s presidential bid. Conservatives question McCain’s opposition to a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. He opposes same-sex marriage, but says it should be regulated by the states.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17222147/
Signed, John DUBYA McCain
Hi Astrobuff! & all!
Anyway, the WaPo story seems to be mostly out of the news cycle but I hope those investigative reporters get a Pullitzer and that notice was taken by alot of people like Alan here in Seattle and his friends at the VA and who work with the homeless. & thanks to all who nagged their legislators, local & national, about the situation. There need to be Congressional hearings about the aftermath of the war as well as the leadup and the conduct of the war(s).
Interesting takes on prospective candidates. Well McCain is certainly going for the right, not just the moderates. No surprise there. I guess in the primaries people go for the outer wings of their party where the activists are and later wrangle for those in the middle.
Britney is selling her hair for charity. India/Pakistan and Southern Thailand appear to be new sites of bombing and tragedy. Meanwhile, helicopters keep coming down (Afghanistan this time), suicide bombers keep getting in places like markets (and this time a US base), and our soldiers die several per day, their civilians in double digits in single attacks. No one really knows how many.
We had the good will of the world after 9-11. Slide shows included even large crowds of Iranians in the streets with candles! In 2003 Iran agreed to make a deal about nukes and Condi ignored it, Rove knew about it! We did not have to get involved in the Afghan/Russia war or the Iran/Iraq war from the sidelines. We helped set up the situation that led to today. Groups of countries could have interceded to find out what was going on at the Kuwait/Iraq border in 1991 and Iraq might have been less destabilized. We did not try to avoid fighting both Sunni insurgents (such as fired, unemployed ex-Ba'athist civil servants), Sunni terrorists (such as Al Quaida rebelling against Saudi royals), and Shiite poverty-stricken nationalist fanatics.
We did not even have personnel who spoke Arabic - they were canned if they were gay. & no one acknowledge or dealt with the Israeli/Palestinian clash, so there were always martyrs to inspire those in other places to violence (such as cities in Europe), further fueling anger leading to terrorism. We could have coordinated with international intelligence agencies after 9/11, freezing assets. We could have got Bin Laden at Tora Bora. Remember reports of the tall man, seen from the air, with all his four wives? Then he disappears into a cave and is never seen again except on tape .. What ever happened to all Saddam's doubles? Are they doing comedy now?
Now there is a new survey where people in many countries say the war is political, NOT a clash of civilizations. That goes along with the rubbish about remaking a new middle east and spreading democracy. So it IS about oil.
Anyway, good morning.
Nyc from A Pen Dipped in Blood tells me we shouldn't give up.
Meme is starting to spread.
Independent of our earlier conversation this verbiage was on C&L yesterday:
My hope is that showing videos such as this one and bringing you the information that the traditional media downplays or hides that it propel you to take action.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/02/18/iraq-the-hidden-story/
See, this is Vietnam all over again. We picked up hitch hikers before, South Dakota, who did helicopter gunning while on acid. When they returned, no one would hire them except the carnival. They were called "baby killers" because word got out about the Mi Lai Massacre, their Abu Graib. More soldiers committed suicide after that war than died in that war (over 50,000) and you will see homeless from the Vietnam war on the streets of every city in America.
When I first worked in head-injury, a patient commented, "You wear more army green than any civilian I've ever met!" He flipped out (he had a recent head injury after a car accident but also a prior one when in Vietnam) one night. A helicopter landed on the roof, bringing in a new patient. He thought he was back in the Vietnam War and he put the legrest of his wheelchair through a window. He tried to attack the Filipino cleaning ladies because he thought they were Viet Cong.
Deja vu.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/18/AR2007021801335
_pf.html
Those who aren't old enough to buy a drink at the bar huddle outside near a magnolia tree and smoke cigarettes. Wearing hoodies and furry bedroom slippers, they look like kids at summer camp who've crept out of their rooms, except some have empty pants legs or limbs pinned by medieval-looking hardware. Medication is a favorite topic.
"Dude, [expletive] Paxil saved my life."
"I been on methadone for a year, I'm tryin' to get off it."
"I didn't take my Seroquel last night and I had nightmares of charred bodies, burned crispy like campfire marshmallows."
Mologne House is afloat on a river of painkillers and antipsychotic drugs. One night, a strapping young infantryman loses it with a woman who is high on her son's painkillers. "Quit taking all the soldier medicine!" he screams. Pill bottles clutter the nightstands: pills for depression or insomnia, to stop nightmares and pain, to calm the nerves.
Here at Hotel Aftermath, a crash of dishes in the cafeteria can induce seizures in the combat-addled. If a taxi arrives and the driver looks Middle Eastern, soldiers refuse to get in. Even among the gazebos and tranquility of the Walter Reed campus in upper Northwest Washington, manhole covers are sidestepped for fear of bombs and rooftops are scanned for snipers.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/18/AR2007021801335_
pf.html
--
We need to get this article in the hands of every person considering enlistment and those who are enlisted but are still stateside.
Posted by: astrobuff at February 19, 2007 03:19 AM
And how exactly is it going to help to tell folks who have enlisted that their government is going to treat them like crap if they become wounded in action?
Harrassing politicians or using the media to effect change is one thing, but pissing off the people who have the least to give and are losing the most on our behalf is hardly a selling point in my mind.
V - my answer (you may hear from Astrobuff later)
People who are enlisted and also their families and also those of us who are civilians are taxpayers and consumers. We all need to demand good treatment for health care and education and roads and so on. We need to get what we are promised, in either case.
Those who consider going to recruiting offices or who join the military need to be informed about what may happen. They give up certain rights when they join. They need to know that. I knew all too many in my youth who were led to believe they would be sent to Germany and ended up in Vietnam. I watched my dad have to have shock treatments and not even recognize me.
It's always easy to use the argument that dissent is unpatriotic or that criticism of the system will undermine morale and some will always do this. "On our behalf" is an assumption. Corporations seem to benefit most from our defense.
Here is a nice article on John Kerry, someone who has seen war, protested war and advocated for vets consistently.
Kerry’s input to be valued
Two years from now, when George Bush leaves office, he will leave behind a tattered domestic policy and a severely frayed foreign policy that in some places of the world is broken, embittered, violent and organized into very different camps whose only common denominator is a raging anti-American sentiment.
On Sept. 11, the world was at our feet, understanding our anguish and offering a hand of friendship. Today, much of the world is after our throat, burning our flag, and using foreign trade and oil as weapons of economic destruction against us.
The question that engages many of us - not as Democrats or Republicans but as human beings - is how to approach the project of restoring America’s place in the world.
America must find a path out of Iraq, rebuild our military, re-engage the fight in Afghanistan, restore our diplomacy - especially in the Middle East - and suture together the security coalitions that this administration tore apart with its preference for unilateral action and its disdain for our allies.
Our role, our responsibility, is to engage our allies - and our adversaries - on the problems that can no longer be confined behind borders. We need a fair trade policy with China and India that stops driving Americans’ jobs from our country. We need to keep our doors open to visitors without alienating our neighbors and further eroding simple common decency toward migrants.
We must lead, not follow, other nations in limiting carbon emissions to fight global warming. We must stop global trafficking in drugs and sex slaves in ways that honor the dignity of its victims and the sovereignty of the nations involved.
How do you accomplish all of these things in a world threatened by the proliferation of dangerous weapons and divisive ideologies, especially when our White House flexes its political muscle by declaring anyone unpatriotic when he or she dares to disagree?
The neo-conservatives led us into a morass because they saw the world as they wanted it to be, not as it was. The people who will help lead us out will be both more realistic and more idealistic. These internationalists, these patriots, are in short-supply, which is what brings me to John Kerry.
(big snip - go to the link at the bottom to read the rest).
There’s an important role for Kerry to play, now. For those of us who still hold on as moderate Republicans of the past, Kerry’s is the only voice making sense, presenting a strategy and talking honestly and openly about the challenges we face and the country he loves.
Hat tip to mbk
More at: http://news.bostonherald.com/editorial/view.bg?articleid=183750&format=&page=1
You know, in a way it all makes sense. Government is shrinking a la Norquist and soon care for vets will be farmed out to the private sector, for profit. It's happening already, such as the new Intrepid Center in Texas. & it's happened with juvenile delinquency facilities, as in Jeb Bush's Florida, & it's happened all over the country with drug rehab & head injury & nursing homes. The private sector & drug companies will eventually have even more say over who runs the country & when we go to war, if the trend toward privatization of everything continues.
CNN QuickVote
Do you agree with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid that the Iraq war is "the worst foreign policy mistake" in U.S. history?
Yes 62% 14602 votes
No 38% 8868 votes
Total: 23470 votes
My Brother's Brief Correspondance with an Army Recruiter
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/2/19/11213/2643
This Reduced Me to Tears - Hotel Aftermath & Poll - by testvet
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/2/19/104656/164
Terrorizing Lawyers - by Jesselyn Raddack
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/2/19/65324/9733
Holy cow! A pro-Kerry piece published in the Boston Herald? Quick, look up and see the pigs flying overhead.
Posted by: Otter at February 19, 2007 12:09 PM
Can I get a lift to the airpork?
U.S. Troops in Iraq: 72% Say End War in 2006
Zogby Poll shows just one in five troops want to heed Bush call to stay “as long as they are needed”
While 58% say mission is clear, 42% say U.S. role is hazy
Plurality believes Iraqi insurgents are mostly homegrown
Almost 90% think war is retaliation for Saddam’s role in 9/11, most don’t blame Iraqi public for insurgent attacks
Majority of troops oppose use of harsh prisoner interrogation
Plurality of troops pleased with their armor and equipment
An overwhelming majority of 72% of American troops serving in Iraq think the U.S. should exit the country within the next year, and more than one in four say the troops should leave immediately, a new Le Moyne College/Zogby International survey shows.
HAPPY YEAR OF THE PIG
Posted by: not my president at February 19, 2007 12:21 PM
I SUPPORT THE TROOPS...
APATHY KILLS
Sorry, monkey, the airpork is temporarily closed due to all the devils ice-skating on the runways.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House on Sunday disagreed with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's claim that the Iraq war was "the worst foreign policy mistake" in U.S. history.
White House press secretary Tony Snow said it was important to remove Saddam Hussein from power and noted that a majority of senators voted in 2002 to authorize the use of force in Iraq.
He said President Bush should not see votes in Congress in opposition of his new Iraqi strategy as a rebuke.
"The strategy has barely had a chance to begin working," Snow said.
-snip-
"This war is a serious situation," Reid said Saturday. "It involves the worst foreign policy mistake in the history of this country. ... We find ourselves in a very deep hole. We need to find a way to dig out of it."
Snow disagreed.
"The war is tough, but the solution is not to get out. It is to provide the kinds of resources and reinforcements our forces need to get the job done, and at the same time say to the Iraqis `You guys got to step up,"' Snow responded.
He said the president understands the importance of debate about the war on Capitol Hill and understands lawmakers' anxiety about the war.
"What I would say to members of Congress is: Calm down and take a look at what's going on, and ask yourself a simple question: If you support the troops, would you deny them the reinforcements they think are necessary to complete the mission?"'
more...
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/19/wh.congress.iraq/index.html
Posted by: monkey at February 19, 2007 10:02 AM
McCain represents ALL that is wrong with the Third-World Banana Republic of Arizona.
He even tried to help Ahnuld turn California into a third-world banana republic itself, by imposing Arizona's anti-labor laws on California. Fortunately the voters turned that attempt down - though barely.
Arizona is the one state I will NEVER forgive.
V askes: "And how exactly is it going to help to tell folks who have enlisted that their government is going to treat them like crap if they become wounded in action?"
Um, so, what will you be doing today to address this travesty?
I strongly suggest you read today's second article (link posted by not my president above). The thrust of the Hotel Aftermath article today is about the military denying disability to soldiers, because their injuries were considered 'preexisting.' Dell -- who is showcased in the article -- got a head injury in Iraq. The military tried to give 0% disability, cause... well, they said.. he was actually retarded BEFORE he got injured. His wife aptly states, "well, you took him." Okay, they didn't say he was retarded, but said he was 'slow' in highschool.
V, you talk about those with the least to give (the military personnel)..... then what will you give or do for them TODAY. Cause our govt has stripped them of every dignity.
Surely you won't mind if I dissuade some kid from enlisting, will you? And directing that kid to finding funding for college, will you? So he has a damn chance?
Or do you want that kid to sign up and get injured and come back to the 'big surprise' of life as an injured/disabled vet?