Troops in Support of the War

SenaxFlatulus · #1 (**permalink**) 04-13-2006, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Troops in Support Of the War

By Wade Zirkle
Thursday, April 13, 2006; A21

Earlier this year there was a town hall meeting on the Iraq war, sponsored by Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), with the participation of such antiwar organizations as CodePink and MoveOn.org. The event also featured Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), a former Marine who had become an outspoken critic of the war. To this Iraq war veteran, it was a good example of something that's become all too common: People from politics, the media and elsewhere purporting to represent "our" views. With all due respect, most often they don't.

The tenor of the town meeting was mostly what one might expect, but during the question-and-answer period, a veteran injured in Afghanistan stood up to offer his view. "If I didn't have a herniated disc, I would volunteer to go to Iraq in a second with my troops," said Mark Seavey, a former Army sergeant who had recently returned from Afghanistan. "I know you keep saying how you have talked to the troops and the troops are demoralized, and I really resent that characterization. The morale of the troops I talk to is phenomenal, which is why my troops are volunteering to go back despite the hardships. . . ."

"And, Congressman Moran, 200 of your constituents just arrived back from Afghanistan -- we never got a letter, we never got a visit from you, you didn't come to our homecoming. The only thing we got was a letter from the governor of this state thanking us for our service in Iraq, when we were in Afghanistan. That's reprehensible. I don't know who you two are talking to, but the morale of the troops is very high."

What was the response? Murtha said nothing, while Moran attempted to move on, no pun intended, stating: "That wasn't in the form of a question, it was a statement."

It was indeed a statement; a statement from both a constituent and a veteran that should have elicited something more than silence or a dismissive comment highlighting a supposed breach of protocol. This exchange, captured on video (it was on C-SPAN), has since been forwarded from base to base in military circles. It has not been well received there, and it only raises the already high level of frustration among military personnel that their opinions are not being heard.

In view of his distinguished military career, John Murtha has been the subject of much attention from the media and is a sought-after spokesman for opponents of the Iraq war. He has earned the right to speak. But his comments supposedly expressing the negative views of those who have and are now serving in the Middle East run counter to what I and others know and hear from our own colleagues -- from junior officers to the enlisted backbone of our fighting force.

Murtha undoubtedly knows full well that the greatest single thing that drags on morale in war is the loss of a buddy. But second to that is politicians questioning, in amplified tones, the validity of that loss to our families, colleagues, the nation and the world.

While we don't question his motives, we do question his assumptions. When he called for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, there was a sense of respectful disagreement among most military personnel. But when he subsequently stated that he would not join today's military, he made clear to the majority of us that he is out of touch with the troops. Quite frankly, it was received as a slap in the face.

Like so many others past and present, I proudly volunteered to serve in the military. I served one tour in Iraq and then volunteered to go back. Veterans continue to make clear that they are determined to succeed in Iraq. They are making this clear the best way they can: by volunteering to go back for third and sometimes fourth deployments. This fact is backed up by official Pentagon recruitment reports released as recently as Monday.

The morale of the trigger-pulling class of today's fighting force is strong. Unfortunately, we have not had a microphone or media audience willing to report our comments. Despite this frustration, our military continues to proudly dedicate itself to the mission at hand: a free, democratic and stable Iraq and a more secure America. All citizens have a right to express their views on this important national challenge, and all should be heard. Veterans ask no more, and they deserve no less.

The writer is executive director of Vets for Freedom. He served two tours in Iraq with the Marines before being wounded in action.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...pinion/columns

sputterman · #2 (**permalink**) 04-13-2006, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SenaxFlatulus";p=&quot

Quote:

Troops in Support Of the War

By Wade Zirkle
Thursday, April 13, 2006; A21

Earlier this year there was a town hall meeting on the Iraq war, sponsored by Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), with the participation of such antiwar organizations as CodePink and MoveOn.org. The event also featured Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), a former Marine who had become an outspoken critic of the war. To this Iraq war veteran, it was a good example of something that's become all too common: People from politics, the media and elsewhere purporting to represent "our" views. With all due respect, most often they don't.

The tenor of the town meeting was mostly what one might expect, but during the question-and-answer period, a veteran injured in Afghanistan stood up to offer his view. "If I didn't have a herniated disc, I would volunteer to go to Iraq in a second with my troops," said Mark Seavey, a former Army sergeant who had recently returned from Afghanistan. "I know you keep saying how you have talked to the troops and the troops are demoralized, and I really resent that characterization. The morale of the troops I talk to is phenomenal, which is why my troops are volunteering to go back despite the hardships. . . ."

"And, Congressman Moran, 200 of your constituents just arrived back from Afghanistan -- we never got a letter, we never got a visit from you, you didn't come to our homecoming. The only thing we got was a letter from the governor of this state thanking us for our service in Iraq, when we were in Afghanistan. That's reprehensible. I don't know who you two are talking to, but the morale of the troops is very high."

What was the response? Murtha said nothing, while Moran attempted to move on, no pun intended, stating: "That wasn't in the form of a question, it was a statement."

It was indeed a statement; a statement from both a constituent and a veteran that should have elicited something more than silence or a dismissive comment highlighting a supposed breach of protocol. This exchange, captured on video (it was on C-SPAN), has since been forwarded from base to base in military circles. It has not been well received there, and it only raises the already high level of frustration among military personnel that their opinions are not being heard.

In view of his distinguished military career, John Murtha has been the subject of much attention from the media and is a sought-after spokesman for opponents of the Iraq war. He has earned the right to speak. But his comments supposedly expressing the negative views of those who have and are now serving in the Middle East run counter to what I and others know and hear from our own colleagues -- from junior officers to the enlisted backbone of our fighting force.

Murtha undoubtedly knows full well that the greatest single thing that drags on morale in war is the loss of a buddy. But second to that is politicians questioning, in amplified tones, the validity of that loss to our families, colleagues, the nation and the world.

While we don't question his motives, we do question his assumptions. When he called for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, there was a sense of respectful disagreement among most military personnel. But when he subsequently stated that he would not join today's military, he made clear to the majority of us that he is out of touch with the troops. Quite frankly, it was received as a slap in the face.

Like so many others past and present, I proudly volunteered to serve in the military. I served one tour in Iraq and then volunteered to go back. Veterans continue to make clear that they are determined to succeed in Iraq. They are making this clear the best way they can: by volunteering to go back for third and sometimes fourth deployments. This fact is backed up by official Pentagon recruitment reports released as recently as Monday.

The morale of the trigger-pulling class of today's fighting force is strong. Unfortunately, we have not had a microphone or media audience willing to report our comments. Despite this frustration, our military continues to proudly dedicate itself to the mission at hand: a free, democratic and stable Iraq and a more secure America. All citizens have a right to express their views on this important national challenge, and all should be heard. Veterans ask no more, and they deserve no less.

The writer is executive director of Vets for Freedom. He served two tours in Iraq with the Marines before being wounded in action.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...pinion/columns

noetsi · #3 (**permalink**) 04-13-2006, 07:20 PM

the great majority of the US Army in Iraq believe the war is a mistake and the US should leave.

SenaxFlatulus · #4 (**permalink**) 04-13-2006, 09:09 PM

I know better than to ask you for a link because it's just beneath you.

Could you at least tell us the name of this poll?

How do you explain the record number of re-enlistments in the Army? If these polls say a great majority of the U.S. Army in Iraq want to leave, then why are they asking to go back?

noetsi · #5 (**permalink**) 04-13-2006, 09:23 PM

Why the military has had to signficantly lower its targets for recruitment, because people are not joining? Perhaps because Iraq is not real popular....

Quote:

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.

http://www.zogby.com/NEWS/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075

This provides additional information on the poll

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0301/dailyUpdate.html

The12thMan · #6 (**permalink**) 04-13-2006, 09:36 PM

Nice poll. Shame it doesn't support your contention.

justabubba · #7 (**permalink**) 04-13-2006, 10:21 PM

it's a direct quote ... try again

Quote:

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.

noetsi · #8 (**permalink**) 04-14-2006, 01:09 AM

Quote:

An overwhelming majority of 72% of American troops serving in Iraq think the U.S. should exit the country within the next year

not support my contention which is this

Quote:

the great majority of the US Army in Iraq believe the war is a mistake and the US should leave.

Sort of baffled there.

This is the only poll that I know of on this issue. Ancedotal evidence suggest the troops are increasingly disenchanted with the war as well.

SenaxFlatulus · #9 (**permalink**) 04-14-2006, 04:25 AM

It's easy to see that someone stationed in a far away place as hostile as a desert climate may be, without war all around, would still be met with the sentiment of wanting to be home rather than stationed abroad. Even our troops in World War 2 didn't want to be there. That was a war where our entire nation was behind the troops and everyone knew what was at stake. In today's society here, we have large numbers of people who aren't behind the war due to the left-leaning media and the anti-war efforts of people such as Cindy Sheehan, Michael Moore, Hollywood elite, and the Democratic party leadership.

The sentiment reflected in the above article, as well as this one:http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/...ists/52321.htm
shows that the troops who are serving over there are re-enlisting in huge numbers because they believe in their mission. They see the effect of their efforts every day, and feel personally invested in the future of Iraq. They actually believe in what they're doing.

It's also easy to see that those potential recruits who are here in our society see every day in our media and on bulletin boards such as this one, people who are eager to push the anti-war agenda. They see it every day. It's no surprise that enlistment of new recruits is down. Congratulations on noticing the propaganda in our society against the war is working. Luckily for us, there are those who are still willing to fight for the freedom of Iraq, and to protect America despite what the left says.

Hard-Driver · #10 (**permalink**) 04-14-2006, 06:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SenaxFlatulus";p=&quot

It's easy to see that someone stationed in a far away place as hostile as a desert climate may be, without war all around, would still be met with the sentiment of wanting to be home rather than stationed abroad. Even our troops in World War 2 didn't want to be there. That was a war where our entire nation was behind the troops and everyone knew what was at stake. In today's society here, we have large numbers of people who aren't behind the war due to the left-leaning media and the anti-war efforts of people such as Cindy Sheehan, Michael Moore, Hollywood elite, and the Democratic party leadership.

The sentiment reflected in the above article, as well as this one:http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/...ists/52321.htm
shows that the troops who are serving over there are re-enlisting in huge numbers because they believe in their mission. They see the effect of their efforts every day, and feel personally invested in the future of Iraq. They actually believe in what they're doing.

It's also easy to see that those potential recruits who are here in our society see every day in our media and on bulletin boards such as this one, people who are eager to push the anti-war agenda. They see it every day. It's no surprise that enlistment of new recruits is down. Congratulations on noticing the propaganda in our society against the war is working. Luckily for us, there are those who are still willing to fight for the freedom of Iraq, and to protect America despite what the left says.

You mention that the entire nation was behind WWII. Then seem to be trying to argue that because of a biased media and activists like Cindy Sheehan, that the country does not support Iraq like WWII.

May I suggest that the difference is that we had a clear purpose in WWII. And that the media and activists are reflecting the thoughts of much of the country, rather than the thoughts of the country reflecting the media. And the reason why the thoughts of the country are doubtful about this war is becuase the war does not have a clear purpose.

In that survey posted above, I think one of the more interesting sections is the reason for being there part:

Quote:

The wide-ranging poll also shows that 58% of those serving in country say the U.S. mission in Iraq is clear in their minds, while 42% said it is either somewhat or very unclear to them, that they have no understanding of it at all, or are unsure. While 85% said the U.S. mission is mainly “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks,” 77% said they also believe the main or a major reason for the war was “to stop Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq.”

Seems like many of the troops think Saddam had something to do with 9/11

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode