May 26, 2008
In Memorium
But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate — we can not consecrate — we can not hallow — this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
Posted by jnfr at 11:36 AM | Comments (0)
May 28, 2007
In Memorium
In honor of those who have given their lives to defend us.
And I want to echo today's Denver Post, as well. This Memorial Day, honor the living too.
Posted by jnfr at 03:14 PM | Comments (0)
March 23, 2007
Shut Down Guantanamo
Today we learn that Defense Secretary Gates pressed for the closure of the Guantanamo prison camp, stating that the reputation of the camp was so tainted that any legal proceedings there would automatically be viewed as illegitimate. Condoleeza Rice joined him in urging the President to shut the camp down, and move the detainees to facilities in the United States.
Mr. Gates’s arguments were rejected after Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and some other government lawyers expressed strong objections to moving detainees to the United States, a stance that was backed by the office of Vice President Dick Cheney, administration officials said.
Why am I not surprised? Cheney and Rumsfeld have always coveted the power to detain and torture at will.
Given that most of the men and boys held at Guantanamo really are enemies of the United States (though we do know that at least some of them have been innocent), there is every reason to bring them under our rule of law, on our soil and in line with military justice. Well, except for this:
Some administration lawyers are deeply reluctant to move terrorism suspects to American soil because it could increase their constitutional and statutory rights — and invite an explosion of civil litigation. Guantánamo was chosen because it was an American military facility but not on American soil.
Our Constitution is stronger than this. Our people are stronger than this. Our rights, as declared by the founders, are not weakened by extending them even to our enemies. On the contrary, this is how we maintain our moral standing in the world. Denying rights, torturing and detaining and extraditing people both guilty and innocent, makes us no better than any savage people. We are better than that.
So I'm glad to hear that Gates at least tried to shut the place down and restore the rule of law. And even though he failed, he did have one good effect.
In the end, Mr. Gates did succeed in killing plans to build a $100 million courthouse and detention complex at Guantánamo, after he argued that the large and expensive project would leave the impression of a long-lasting American detainee operation there and that the money could be more effectively spent elsewhere by the Pentagon. Mr. Gates approved a far more modest facility at one-tenth of the cost.
That's something anyway.
__________________________________
Marking the fourth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, Slate has put together a slide show of a somber series of black and white photos taken at Guantanamo. Take a look and see for yourself.
Posted by jnfr at 08:47 AM | Comments (0)
March 15, 2007
Murtha speaking truth
We simply aren't taking care of the troops.
Many thanks to Nancy Pelosi for putting up the C-SPAN clips.
Perhaps the counts of wounded soldiers are off because we're suiting them up and sending them back whether they're really able to serve or not.
Posted by jnfr at 12:14 PM | Comments (0)
February 24, 2007
Mark Shields on the Walter Reed debacle
He was quite eloquent last night on the News Hour discussing the Washington Post articles on the lack of care for our wounded veterans.
JIM LEHRER: Speaking of the troops, what do you think of the Walter Reed story that the Washington Post broke and has been covering?MARK SHIELDS: Well, first of all, I'd like to say it's a great tribute to the positive power of a free press. That Dana Priest and Anne Hull and the editors of the Washington Post put it on the front page on a Sunday and a Monday, and it got a result.
Families all over this country have been complaining about the treatment out there. It got nowhere. It didn't get a hearing in the Congress. It didn't get the kind of coverage it should have gotten.
And there's a terrible political reality here. These people, these young Americans who've gone over there, and they're wounded, are not -- their parents do not summer in Nantucket or Santa Fe. Their mothers don't wear designer originals. Their fathers are not friends of Bill, and they aren't Pioneers or Rangers for George W. Bush.
These people come from modest backgrounds, and they don't have any clout. They don't have any lobbyists on their side. They don't have any political action committee. They have absolutely no advocates and no voice, and, in this case, the free press was their voice.
Shame on all of us for not being there first. I mean, I haven't been out to Walter Reed myself, and I haven't been aware. But it's more than Building 18. It isn't a mold story or a mice story.
It's a story about bureaucratic indifference, about making these -- putting them in an adversarial relationship, instead of recognizing the enormous cost that you pay for going into combat, and the psychological trauma and damage and wounds that these people carry for the rest of their life.
And of course, knowledge of this has been around for a while. Salon reported on the problems a couple of years ago.
UPDATE: For more on the Army's bureaucratic problems and how hard disabled vets have to struggle to get benefits, read today's Washington Post cover story "Battle Worn", by the most excellent Paula Span.
Posted by jnfr at 08:46 AM | Comments (0)
May 29, 2006
In Memorium
Memorial Day 2006. We will not forget.
UPDATE: Best Memorial Day post of the year, Pachacutec over at Firedoglake.
I know I’m not alone when I say, I’m an American and I’m not afraid. I know I’m going to die. I accept that I’m going to die, no problem. What I do not accept and will not accept is the notion that I must live as a slave to fear for the purposes of craven, cowardly men who, in their time, pissed the bed rather than fight an actual war, later to become powerful and use that power to line their pockets with my tax dollars. Give me liberty or give me death. Take your "terror" and shove it.
Posted by jnfr at 11:56 AM | Comments (0)
March 05, 2006
Hello army.mil!
machinet.jackson.amedd.army.mil
192.138.77.36
You've visited a lot in the last week or two. I hope you've found what you're looking for.
Posted by jnfr at 02:19 PM | Comments (6)
March 06, 2005
Army misses recruitment goal
For the first time in five years, the Army has missed its monthly recruitment goal, and not by a little, either. Recruitment came up 27% short, even as the Army has boosted recruitment bonuses to $20,000. Apparently the poor and working class are catching on to the Administration's misuse of our armed forces, and thinking twice before offering themselves up to be fed into this illegal war.
Posted by jnfr at 09:35 AM | Comments (0)
January 06, 2005
How to help our wounded vets
Since Walter Reed is, for the moment, full up on phone cards, and didn't specify where else we can send donations, I've been asking around for some possibilities. Here's what I've found.
Fisher House is an organization that provides local housing and other support to family members of the wounded while they visit with and tend their loved ones. They offer several ways of helping with either specific families or general needs.
Army Emergency Relief is a private non-profit organization that has been helping vets since 1942. They offer emergency funds for rent, food, housing and other essentials, give scholarships to the children of veterans, and help with medical and dental care for vets and their families. They primarily need cash, and all donations are tax-deductible.
Support Our Troops is a page put together by the Department of Defense which lists many other organizations which give support in dozens of ways to our troops and their families. If you want to search around for an organization that can use your money or your talents, this is a great place to start.
Our young men and women are being killed and wounded daily while following orders to the best of their ability. We owe them every kind of help and support we can provide, whatever we think of the politicians who have sent them off to fight.
Posted by jnfr at 01:37 PM | Comments (0)
A bad combination
Oliver Willis had the best post of the day yesterday, when he showed us the very bad combination of these two stories:
There is rising concern amongst senior officials that President Bush does not grasp the increasingly grim reality of the security situation in Iraq because he refuses to listen to that type of information. Our sources say that attempts to brief Bush on various grim realities have been personally rebuffed by the President, who actually says that he does not want to hear “bad news.”
Rather, Bush makes clear that all he wants are progress reports, where they exist, and those facts which seem to support his declared mission in Iraq...building democracy. “That's all he wants to hear about,” we have been told. So “in” are the latest totals on school openings, and “out” are reports from senior US military commanders (and those intelligence experts still on the job) that they see an insurgency becoming increasingly effective, and their projection that “it will just get worse.”
And this one:
U.S. reserves nearly 'broken,' says chief
The U.S. Army Reserve, tapped heavily to provide soldiers for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, is “degenerating into a ‘broken’ force” due to dysfunctional military policies, the Army Reserve’s chief said in a memo made public Wednesday.
This is a dangerous situation, and it doesn't look like this administration is even willing to notice.
Posted by jnfr at 08:13 AM | Comments (0)
January 03, 2005
Hold the phone cards!
Walter Reed is reporting that they have received so many gifts for wounded veterans, including stacks of phone cards, that they are asking everyone to hold off sending anything more for at least a couple of months. They've simply run out of space to store things.
They suggest instead sending money or gifts to other organizations which help wounded soldiers and their families. But they don't name any, and I don't know which organizations might need help. Any ideas?
Posted by jnfr at 05:48 PM | Comments (0)
December 14, 2004
Recruitment problems
Not surprisingly, Army recruitment isn't going so well these days, and generals warn that this may require us to consider a draft.
Army Reserve recruiting is in a "precipitous decline" that could provoke new debate over a draft if not slowed, the Reserve's top general said Monday.
Some reservists are filing suit over attempts to extend their service without their permission, as the Army invokes "stop loss" orders that prevent soldiers from leaving even once their service is up.
The dirty little secret of military recruiters is that, regardless of the length of the initial active duty contract, everyone who joins the military incurs an eight-year obligation under Section 10145 of 10 USC. This fact is buried in the long enlistment contract and certainly not emphasized by recruiters, who are under heavy pressure to meet monthly quotas.
Because of this hidden provision, no one has yet been able to escape the stop loss by suing. But what kind of a military do we have, when they can't even tell kids the truth about what they're signing?
It certainly isn't a truly volunteer military. It's more of a back-door draft and something like slavery, slavery that puts people's lives and bodies on the line. Fortunately, I don't have kids. If you do, keep them away from the recruiters if you can.
Posted by jnfr at 12:15 PM | Comments (1)
November 24, 2004
National Guard needs more recruits
Since joining the National Guard is now equivalent to enlisting for active duty in a war zone, with no certainty you'll be allowed to return home once your shift is up, it's not surprising to find that the Army National Guard is having trouble meeting recruitment goals.
Such is the plight of the Indiana National Guard, struggling to boost its numbers at a time when potential recruits are retreating because of the war in Iraq. Since 2001, the Guard’s ranks have shrunk by more than 700 soldiers. Still, Indiana has the fifth largest Guard unit in the country.
The Guard is responding to its shortage with a vigorous statewide recruiting campaign and by putting more boots on the ground in recruiting offices. It missed its target goal this year by more than 400 recruits. Nationwide, states missed a combined goal of 56,000 recruits by about 5,000.
Posted by jnfr at 09:18 AM | Comments (0)