Gates Raises Possibility Of Deploying More National Guard And Reserve Forces To Iraq
Gates Raises Possibility Of Deploying More National Guard And Reserve Forces To Iraq
Today on ABC’s This Week, host George Stephanopoulos challenged President Bush’s assertion that the troop drawdown is because of “success” in Iraq. He asked Defense Secretary Robert Gates, “Wasn’t the drawdown a matter of military necessity?”
Gates insisted that the military was not broken, noting the large size of the armed forces: “After all, we’ve got 2.1 million men and women in the United States armed forces. If the circumstances required it, other choices could have been made.”
Stephanopoulos continued to push Gates, asking, “So if General Petraeus comes back in March and says we’re making some progress, but we can’t continue to draw down right now, where would the troops come from?” Gates tried to back away from answering a “hypothetical,” but eventually conceded that they would potentially have to deploy more National Guard and Reserve forces. Watch it:
The United States may have “2.1 million men and women” in the armed forces, but 1.6 million of them have already served in Iraq or Afghanistan. Approximately 525,000 troops have served more than once. Additionally, all “38 of the Army’s available combat units are deployed, have or are just returning or are already scheduled to deploy to Iraq, Afghanistan or elsewhere – leaving the U.S. without any available combat-ready units.”
Despite Gates’s claims, several current and former Bush administration officials have publicly warned for several months that current troop levels could not be sustained past the summer:
Joint Chiefs Chairman Peter Pace: Pace “is expected to advise President Bush to reduce the U.S. force in Iraq next year by almost half” and “is likely to convey concerns by the Joint Chiefs that keeping well in excess of 100,000 troops in Iraq through 2008 will severely strain the military.” [8/24/07]
Army Chief of Staff George Casey: “Right now we have in place deployment and mobilization policies that allow us to meet the current demands. If the demands don’t go down over time, it will become increasingly difficult for us to provide the trained and ready forces.” [8/20/07]
Commanding General Odierno: “We know that the surge of forces will come at least through April at the latest, April of ‘08, and then we’ll have to start to reduce…we know that they will start to reduce in April of ‘08 at the latest.” [8/26/07]
Army Secretary Peter Geren:“[T]he service’s top official, recently said he sees ‘no possibility’ of extending the duty tours of US troops beyond 15 months.” [8/30/07]
Former Secretary of State Colin Powell: “[T]hey probably can’t keep this up at this level past the middle of next year, I would guess. This is a tremendous burden on our troops.” [7/18/07]
Gates’s suggestion that the National Guard and Reserve could be further called upon is also unrealistic. The nation’s governors have confirmed that the Iraq war is straining their states’ abilities to respond to national emergencies. According to a recent report by a congressional commission, nearly “90 percent of Army National Guard units in the United States are rated ‘not ready,” largely “as a result of shortfalls in billions of dollars’ worth of equipment.”
Transcript:
STEPHANOPOULOS: Democrats have also been making the point all week long that this drawdown was much more a function of stress on the military than political success and any kind of political and military success in Iraq.
Here’s what Senator Clinton had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, D-N.Y.: Since troop levels in Iraq must decrease by this amount in order to avoid extending Army deployments beyond 15 months and straining our military even further, taking credit for this troop reduction is like taking credit for the sun coming up in the morning.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHANOPOULOS: Wasn’t the drawdown a matter of military necessity?
GATES: No. I think the way that General Pace and others have described it, other military leaders have described it, is resource informed but not resource driven. After all, we’ve got 2.1 million men and women in the United States armed forces. If the circumstances required it, other choices could have been made.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But hasn’t General Casey, the Army chief of staff, said he wouldn’t even consider extending the tours beyond 15 months, which is pretty much the only way beyond calling in the National Guard that you could get the forces there, isn’t it?
GATES: Well, that’s one alternative, but there are other ways in which you can manage the force that could allow you to sustain that force.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So if General Petraeus comes back in March and says we’re making some progress, but we can’t continue to draw down right now, where would the troops come from?
GATES: Well, I don’t want to get into that kind of a hypothetical. Obviously, his expectation is that he will be able to continue the progress that we’ve seen on the ground in Anbar and around Baghdad, and so he’s anticipating that he’ll be able to follow through on what the president announced.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But you’re saying alternatives are on the table, so does that indicate a willingness to extend tours, if necessary?
GATES: We do not want to extend tours. There’s no question about that. And we would look at alternatives other than extending tours. But I think that no one believes right now that that’s going to prove necessary.
STEPHANOPOULOS: As you know, Democrats and some Republicans in Congress want to pretty much mandate that, that the tours cannot be extended. Senator Jim Webb of Virginia wants to pass a bill that would say that troops must spend as much time at home as their previous tour in Iraq. And it appears that they’re getting close to the 60 votes they need to pass the Senate.
Would you recommend a veto of that bill?
GATES: Yes, I would.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Why?
GATES: Because it would be extremely difficult for us to manage that. It really is a back-door way to try and force the president to accelerate the drawdowns. Again, the drawdowns have to be based on the conditions on the ground. We have to leave Iraq in a much more stable place than it has been over the last two or three years.
So the alternative to accelerating the drawdowns is to take a number of steps in terms of managing the force that actually involve some of the things that I was just alluding to, potentially using more Guard and Reserve. Extensions are a possibility if we were to have to comply with a law like that, that gave us no flexibility.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
What we need is a few republican enclaves consumed in forest fires, floods and tornado damage, to pound home the message that using the Guard in Iraq is a bad idea. They”ll never get the message until it happens to them.
September 16th, 2007 at 12:25 pmSo, the general in the field says we need another Friedman unit.
Now the Secretary of Defense says we need to be able to send our troops over there regardless of the amount of time they get to spend at home. And more and more, we rely on people who signed up for one weekend a month, two weeks a year…
And the surge goes on…
And the surge goes on….
September 16th, 2007 at 12:29 pmWrecking ball Bush has the pine box plan of bringing home the troops from Iraq: pine box by pine box.
September 16th, 2007 at 12:30 pmBush will bring the troops home, one at a time and on their backs. Slow Bleed Bush.
-GSD
September 16th, 2007 at 12:38 pmAah yeah run em into the ground Repukes.Why do Repukes hate America ?
September 16th, 2007 at 12:41 pmEveryone of these warmongering, chickenshits, chickenhawk, cowards, who have never even worn combat fatigues, should be required to serve in the wars they think they know so much about. These are the worst people this country has to offer. I will give Insane McCain slack because he obviously left his sanity in the Hanoi Hilton many years ago.
This war must end, if we the people, have to take over the government to kick their sorry, worthless, criminal asses out of office. This is still government of the people, some moronic tyrant.
September 16th, 2007 at 12:43 pmBush probably wishes that robotics technology were perfected to the point that he could build a robot army. Robots don’t have families. Robots don’t have feelings. Robots don’t need R&R. Robots don’t get tired. Robots never have problems of morale or questioning the mission. Robots don’t mind if they get blown up. Robots don’t mind acting as human shields and sitting ducks in the middle of a civil war. Robots follow orders and will shoot anyone you tell them to shoot, anywhere you send them. To build a robot army, all it takes is money to manufacture them, with more deficit spending that Bush is addicted to. With an army of robots, the PNAC Agenda to take over the world in a new American empire could go forth. Unfortunately, while awaiting the perfection of robotics technology, the Bush Administration continues to treat our soldiers as though they were robots.
September 16th, 2007 at 12:44 pmIs there anyone in that administration capable or willing to tell the truth, if only once a month?
September 16th, 2007 at 12:56 pmWhen Alan Greenspan, the quiet, level headed braniac who never criticizes anyone, announces in print that the war in Iraq was over oil, then its time to ACCEPT THE OBVIOUS.
Gates, Bush and the rest need to be fired,and we need to end the mess before Russia and China team up with Iran, and DRIVE US OUT.
September 16th, 2007 at 12:56 pmYou republicans always talk about defeat and how much respect we’ll lose if we pull out.
Well I’ve got news for you.
If you wait until Russia and China team up with Iran, and drive us out, essentially “liberating Iraq” from the US Occupation, just like we did in WW2 for the French, Dutch and Polls, then we’re really going to lose face.
If the US is pushed out of Iraq by the new Russian\Chinese alliance like the Nazi’s were pushed out of France and Holland, then it will take half a century for us to be respected in the international community again.
September 16th, 2007 at 12:59 pmThose in the military, both enlisted and officers, should start to finally acknowledge that they are not fighting for their country; rather, they are fighting for the lies told to them by their government. It is long past the point that those in the military begin to emulate people like Lt. Watada, the members of the IVAW [Iraq Veterans Against the War], and those in the film Sir! No Sir! [which focused on the GI movement during the Vietnam War] by saying NO to the war machine. That is one of the ways, if not THE way, for this occupation to end, by having these soldiers realize that they are complicit in the illegal brutalization and suppression of the Iraqi people.
September 16th, 2007 at 1:01 pmWhat is the actual founding purpose and mission of “THE NATIONAL GUARD?”
The United States National Guard is authorized by the Constitution of the United States. As originally drafted, the Constitution limited the mustering of state militias: without the consent of Congress, states could not “keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace,…or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.” (Article I, Section 10; Clause 3) Congress, however, had a duty to protect states from invasion and domestic violence (Article IV, Section 4). Afraid that Congress would deny states the right to maintain their militias, which had a long history in the Colonial era, the nation passed the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution in 1791, stating that “a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of The People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
The PURPOSE of the National Guard is to serve as a militia to defend the states where they are based.
The REASON why YOUR NATIONAL GUARD is being sent overseas is in order to enable the pending implementation of Martial Law.
Sound ridiculous?
You think it’s just a coincidence that our nation is suffering an AMMUNITION SHORTAGE at the same time we’re sending away our National Guard, and funding a massive buildup of Blackwater Mercenaries??
War causes shortage of bullets to police, hunters
http://media.www.kstatecollegian.com/media/storage/paper1022/news/2007/09/13/TodaysNews/War-Causes.Shortage.Of.Bullets.To.Police.Hunters-2966920.shtml
September 16th, 2007 at 1:01 pmI’m not to concerned, there are still plenty of rocks and sticks at hand.
September 16th, 2007 at 1:06 pmI had to turn off the lies being told on the morning propaganda outlets this morning…they always try to draw comparisons of WWII and Korea and even Vietnam to this clusterf*ck. The thing they are missing in each: We were assisting in overthrowing an army who had invaded the country the war was in…in this case…we are that country. Get some education, morons.
September 16th, 2007 at 1:16 pmNo more troops, no more money without new taxes to pay for them. Paying debts is part of accountability.
September 16th, 2007 at 1:25 pmThose in the military, both enlisted and officers, should start to finally acknowledge that they are not fighting for their country;
Comment by Erroll — September 16, 2007 @ 1:01 pm
I disagree. The soldiers ARE fighting for their country.
Soldiers don’t get to decide the conflict. Whereever, and whenever they fight, its for their country, for it is their country that is sending them to fight.
Its their country that has let them down.
September 16th, 2007 at 1:32 pm… and if the Congress limited foreign tours in combat zones they would force us to send the volunteer fire departments, the boy scouts and the girl scouts! Do you want to be responsible for that?
September 16th, 2007 at 1:34 pmWhen will the American Enterprise Institue send a battalion of their finest warriors?
-GSD
September 16th, 2007 at 1:35 pmThat is one of the ways, if not THE way, for this occupation to end, by having these soldiers realize that they are complicit in the illegal brutalization and suppression of the Iraqi people.
Comment by Erroll — September 16, 2007 @ 1:01 pm
Once again I strongly disagree. Soldiers that step outside of normal operations, and abuse or murder Iraqi civillians are of course bad, and deserve severe punishment.
But the majority of the soldiers are just doing what their country, trained them to do.
Its their country that bears the blame and shame here. NOT the soldiers.
September 16th, 2007 at 1:36 pmDo NOT make the mistake of putting this on the soldiers. The soldiers are bearing the burden of our national sin.
If you want to feel anything for them, feel compassion, and remorse for allowing them to be misused and abused by our government.
After all, we had our chance in 2004, once we had seen the evil that Bush delivered, and yet so many people still voted for him, and thus, voted to abuse the troops, and misuse them, sacrificing them for our folly.
September 16th, 2007 at 1:40 pmI do wholeheartedly agree however, that Generals, like Gen Petraeus deserve our condemnation for shilling for the war. Its not a generals job to sell a war, just to fight it. And if he thinks the war is right, then he should shut up and fight.
But if he thinks its wrong, then its his obligation to resign, and speak out publically, like Major General John Batiste, who is the epitomy of a true American statesman and hero.
September 16th, 2007 at 1:43 pmAt least much of the mainstream press has finally started coughing up the Jesus Juice, and calling Bush on his lies. Even Wolf Blitzer, (thats right, Wolf “poker-face” Blitzer) is openly defying the administrations rhetoric.
Candy Crowly, Blitxer, Brian Williams, Chris Matthews, Dan Abrams, even some of the airhead blondes they get to fill in during the day, ALL calling the Administrations war a sham.
And now, Alan Greenspan, easily one of the most distinguished and universally respected figures in politics, has now come out and criticized Bush, and condemed the war calling it a war “for Oil”.
I like most of you, wish these folks had spoken up sooner, and indeed those are demons they will have to live with for the rest of their lives, but that doesn’t mean we should belittle them for coming forward now.
Remember. Better late to the party, than never.
September 16th, 2007 at 1:53 pmEven Tim Russert looks and sounds fighting mad about this disaster in Iraq, and Chris Matthews looks and sounds like a guy who wants his money back.
September 16th, 2007 at 1:54 pm–greek elections–
September 16th, 2007 at 1:57 pmTo: BARTLEBEE
The military I was in I was told when to sleep, when to wake up, when to eat, when to poop, where to go, and who to shoot.
Hiding behind the troops to get funding for what they order them to do or letting the troops take the fall for doing what they have been ordered to do is ludicrous.
‘Support the Troops” by sending them down the the same road again and again and again till they find the IED with their name on it is the new definition of insanity.
September 16th, 2007 at 2:10 pmBARTLEBEE
“Soldiers don’t get to decide the conflict.” I strongly suggest that you rent or buy the powerful documentary Sir! No Sir! so you can actually discover that those soldiers and other military personnel had a choice and that they realized, that they were indeed dying and ending up maimed and crippled, paralyzed and dismembered, not because they were, as you claim, fighting for their country [did Vietnam or Iraq attack this country?] but for the lies and falsehoods that they were told by their government.
If you were to actually rent that moving film, you would discover, among other things, hearing former Green Beret Donald Duncan state that “I was dong it right but I wasn’t doing right.” You would hear former soldier and and president of the Veterans for Peace David Cline say that “Your silence is keeping that lie going.” You might actually discover, despite your misplaced belief, that those in the military actually have a brain. If you had been in the military, you would have realized that the UCMJ says that those in the military not only have a right but a duty and an obligation not to obey illegal orders.
In addition, the U.S. Army Field Manual 27-10 Section II sub section 498-504 states that those who engage in crimes against peace, crimes against humanity and war crimes can be held responsible for their actions. The Nuremberg Trials also proved that the excuse that “I was only following orders” was not going to prevent those complicit in war crimes from being hanged.
Finally, it would be most instructive to recall the closing lines of Bertolt Brecht’s poem General, Your Tank Is a Powerful Vehicle:
General, man is very useful.
He can fly and he can kill.
But he has one defect:
He can think
Which, apparently, is the last thing that you want those soldiers to end up doing. Thankfully, there are more and more of them who are doing exactly that.
September 16th, 2007 at 2:11 pmBARKBEATLE, I think you should use your massive knowledge and clairvoyance to further the advances of the human race and offer your services up for all of humanity. If you would travel to the Islomofacist world and see if you could cobble together a peace agreement of some kind so we could all “just get along”. Everyone could stop shooting at each other and it would be done and over for all time……..but you know your body would be found in a least 2 pieces if found at all. Nice guys aren’t they? Your view of the world is theory not reality and reality is a .b!tch……is it not!
September 16th, 2007 at 2:14 pmMore soldiers sent to Iraq now or in the near future will adversely affect any chances of Republicans to gain seats or even hold on what they have already in the House and the Senate.
September 16th, 2007 at 2:15 pmIt will for sure jeopardize any chance for Republicans to regroup and come back
The majority feeling now in the country is ‘let’s get out of Iraq; the argument now is over how long that will take and by what time soldiers will be home.
BARKBEATLE,
Comment by boogerBOO!
I think you mean DUNGBEATLE.
September 16th, 2007 at 2:19 pmWhat about a cease fire? What about a weapons exchange? What about reinstating the draft if the Webb amendment fails?
September 16th, 2007 at 2:21 pmDon’t we have tens of thousands of troops in places like Okinawa, Japan, and Korea? Which prompts a second question: If they are not combat ready, how can they properly protect those countries?
September 16th, 2007 at 2:26 pmstrongly suggest that you rent or buy the powerful documentary Sir! No Sir! so you can actually discover that those soldiers and other military personnel had a choice and that they realized, that they were indeed dying and ending up maimed and crippled, paralyzed and dismembered, not because they were, as you claim, fighting for their country [did Vietnam or Iraq attack this country?] but for the lies and falsehoods that they were told by their government.
Comment by Erroll — September 16, 2007 @ 2:11 pm
Oh Bullsh1t.
Get a clue. A soldier refuses to serve in Iraq he can find himself in a military prison. Just ask some of the soldiers who are sitting there now for that very reason.
September 16th, 2007 at 2:27 pmBARKBEATLE, I think you should use your massive knowledge and clairvoyance to further the advances of the human race and offer your services up for all of humanity. If you would travel to the Islomofacist world and see if you could cobble together a peace agreement of some kind so we could all “just get alongâ€. Everyone could stop shooting at each other and it would be done and over for all time……..but you know your body would be found in a least 2 pieces if found at all. Nice guys aren’t they? Your view of the world is theory not reality and reality is a .b!tch……is it not!
Comment by boogerBOO! — September 16, 2007 @ 2:14 pm
uhhh, “boogerboo” is it?
Unlike you, I’m smart enough not to head into a backwards third world country looking for trouble. But you feel free to head over there and tell them how you’re going to either convert or kill them all.
By the way, nice name.
It fits.
September 16th, 2007 at 2:30 pmAfter all Mr P, I always equated you with something that came out of my nose.
September 16th, 2007 at 2:30 pmI think you mean DUNGBEATLE.
Comment by BAN Zooey — September 16, 2007 @ 2:19 pm
Wow. Thats pretty amazing, since no where does it contain any part of my handle.
You guys really got screwed on the funny gene, huh?
September 16th, 2007 at 2:31 pmI have no time for neocons, and just as little time for liberals who want to blame the soldiers for whats happening in Iraq.
The soldiers who are out of line are one thing, and those actively promoting the war are one thing.
But the bulk of them are just following orders, and many reluctantly I might add. Blaming the soldiers for their country sending them into an illegal war, is ignorance on a universal scale. The blame lies with the country as a whole, with the brunt of it on those who voted for these loons, and the rest on those of us who didn’t do enough to stop it.
September 16th, 2007 at 2:36 pmWonder if they are going to be calling back the medically discharged next………
They already send wounded back to the front. IE… The front in this war, since it is an occupation, is anywhere in Iraq. Even the Green Zone gets popped now and then.
“Stop the World and let me off!!!” — Waylon Jennings
September 16th, 2007 at 2:42 pmIt’s going to be difficult to try to control every square inch of the planet Earth. Before the latest invasion we had over 750 bases in 130 countries. Our military budget is about $950 billion every year—all things considered that are for the military but outside the Pentagon budget.
We cannot continue for too long like this. One day the International Monetary Fund is going to declare us a failed state and take us over like Brazil.
September 16th, 2007 at 3:06 pmCheck the Decider-in-Chief out, standing by his man, General Petraeus.
September 16th, 2007 at 3:23 pmyoutube.com/watch?v+xiuRhy4CqzU
#31- Mr. BARTLEBEE
You state that “A soldier refuses to serve in Iraq he can find himself in a military prison.” Did you have to ponder very long to reach that conclusion? Again, if had actually taken the time to see the film Sir! No Sir! you would have realized that all of the soldiers who participated in the GI movement were aware of that obvious truth. Dr. Howard Levy, for example, was found guilty of speaking out and served three years in prison. Navy nurse Lt. Susan Schnall was court martialed because of her activities. Camilio Mejia spent 9 months in jail because he refused to go back to Iraq. He later said that he regretted obeying every order that he was given which contributed to the illegal occupation of Iraq. As David Cline said in Sir! No Sir! “Your silence [meaning the silence of the soldiers] is keeping that lie going.”
As I said earlier, apparently to no avail, the defense of those who were tried at Nuremberg that “I was only following orders” did not work out too well for those who ended up being hanged for their willingness to go along participating in war crimes. Those soldiers who went to jail for their beliefs for saying NO to the war machine should be viewed with the highest regard and as being the true heroes of this country. The hope is that more of them will continue to speak out against this most unnecessary occupation and brutalization of the Iraqi people.
September 16th, 2007 at 3:33 pmThe blame lies with the country as a whole, with the brunt of it on those who voted for these loons, and the rest on those of us who didn’t do enough to stop it.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — September 16, 2007 @ 2:36 pm
Little on the self-righteous side, Bart. What were we supposed to do, start shooting at F-16s when they go ovr head?
September 16th, 2007 at 3:58 pmTo all chickenshit, chickenhawk, warmongering, 28%er, Dubya apologistws: Go enlist, cowards! You are nothing but armchair rangers cheering on the death and destruction of our troops and the Iraq nation. You are worthless pigs.
September 16th, 2007 at 4:30 pmImpeach the crime family of thugs.
September 16th, 2007 at 4:31 pmOur soldiers are dieing for the profit of the military industrial complex and certainly the oil companies Dickless Cheney promised the oil fields in Iraq and Iran. What else was he and Ken Lay and the oil company executives planning that could be so secretive?
Ask yourselves what this administration has been right about in the last six years. Have they ever lied to you you? Have they ever been honest about anything in the past six years? Compassionate Conservative. WMD. Last throes. Mushroom cloud. Think about this lying, incompetent bunch of cowards who cheer the death of our treasury for the profits of their cronies. Impeach and turn over to the Hague for war crime trials.
September 16th, 2007 at 4:35 pmDEATH To Islamo-Stalinism!
Comment by dtis — September 16, 2007 @ 5:04 pm
Mr P ALERT! Mr P ALERT!
September 16th, 2007 at 5:05 pmTrying to sneak in on a back thread is he?
September 16th, 2007 at 5:30 pmthat’s our Pee……..
DEATH To Islamo-Stalinism!
Comment by dtis
Same goes for christian hypocrisy and christian fascism in the name of military industrial complex work…sh$t for brains…go enlist.
September 16th, 2007 at 5:55 pmGates needs to ensure that his Mom is also called up and serving in Iraq.
September 16th, 2007 at 6:18 pmWow, Gates wants to take ALL of our National Guard. Good planning Gates. So what happens if we have an emergency here in the USA? We’re on our own? Why. Why should we be on our own here so that all our resources can be in Iraq being destroyed (both human and mechanical). Gates is turning into a Bush Poodle. Ask me if I am surprised.
September 16th, 2007 at 6:25 pmIf you would travel to the Islomofacist world and see if you could cobble together a peace agreement of some kind so we could all “just get alongâ€.
Comment by boogerBOO!
So booger, what is an Islamofascist That term makes no sense at all. Islam is a religion and here is the definition of a fascist:
So Islam is a religion and fascism is a governmental system. How can the Muslims you so want to hate be fascists? Where is their governmental system. How are they forcibly suppressing opposition and critics? How are they regimenting industry, commerce, etc. And how are they emphasizing an aggressive nationalism?
Wow, I just realized something (not really). Fascism seems to describe the government George Bush has created to a “T”.
September 16th, 2007 at 6:33 pmLittle on the self-righteous side, Bart. What were we supposed to do, start shooting at F-16s when they go ovr head?
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — September 16, 2007 @ 3:58 pm
I included myself in that equation slim, hence the term “us”. And what we should have done, was demand more, protest more, make more noise.
Because last time I checked, back in 03 most of the left wing was on board with the invasion. I wasn’t, and I’m sure you weren’t but most of the liberals in the country were just rolling over.
So no, I don’t think thats a little “self righteous”, although you seem to be a little sensitive in that area.
September 16th, 2007 at 7:06 pm#31- Mr. BARTLEBEE
You state that “A soldier refuses to serve in Iraq he can find himself in a military prison.†Did you have to ponder very long to reach that conclusion? Again, if had actually taken the time to see the film Sir! No Sir! you would have realized that all of the soldiers who participated in the GI movement were aware of that obvious truth. Dr. Howard Levy, for example, was found guilty of speaking out and served three years in prison.
Comment by Erroll — September 16, 2007 @ 3:33 pm
Well I don’t know about you chief, but if I were given the choice of serving three years in prison and being dishonorably discharged, or going to Iraq, I’d go to Iraq, and shoot my rifle up in the air.
September 16th, 2007 at 7:09 pmAs I said earlier, apparently to no avail, the defense of those who were tried at Nuremberg that “I was only following orders†did not work out too well for those who ended up being hanged for their willingness to go along participating in war crimes.
Comment by Erroll — September 16, 2007 @ 3:33 pm
Now you’re just out there.
We didn’t try the German soldiers at Nuremburg. Only the leaders complicit in the atrocities and some SS officers who were likewise notoriously complicit.
The soldiers who fought in the german army in WW2 were no more war criminals than our soldiers are.
September 16th, 2007 at 7:12 pmSoldiers follow orders. Prison is not an acceptable alternative for most normal people. To the ones that do we indeed should honor and admire, but most men, particularly those with families and such, cannot make such a choice, and its wrong of you to demand that they do.
The soldiers go where WE, the PEOPLE, tell them to go, through our elected leaders.
September 16th, 2007 at 7:18 pm-Bartlebee
Though this will probably fall upon deaf ears nonetheless I will attempt to point out the error of your ways. You keep stating your tired and incorrect refrain that “soldiers follow orders.” I said it before but it appears that it bears repeating. The UCMJ states that soldiers have not only a right but a duty and an obligation NOT to obey illegal orders. The U.S. Army Field Manual 27-10 Section II-Crimes Under International Law sub section 498-504 clearly lay out that “Any person, whether a member of the armed forces or a civilian, who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to punishment. Such offenses in connection with war comprise:
a. Crimes against peace.
b. Crimes against humanity.
c. War crimes.
As one of the GIs correctly noted in Sir! No Sir!, being a clerk typist in a war ravaged country does not exonerate a soldier from speaking out and to realize that he is still part of a military that is oppressing a conquered country. You claim that “…its wrong of you to demand that they do.” You may want to try telling that to the Iraqis who have been brutalized and terrorized by the less than benevolent presence of the United States military. This occupation violates the Geneva Convention, the UN Charter, the U.S. Constitution, and the Nuremberg Principles. The soldiers, as witnessed by the GI resistance that took place during the Vietnam War, have it within their power, despite your flawed belief, to bring this illegal occupation to an end. Thankfully, there are people like Lt. Watada, Camilo Mejia, and other members of the IVAW who have had the integrity and courage to put their words into actions. As Lt. Watada wisely pointed out to myself and other veterans last year at the Veterans for Peace convention in Seattle:
“I speak with you about a radical idea. It is one born from the very concept of the American soldier [or service member]. It became instrumental in ending the Vietnam War-but it has long since forgotten The idea is this: that to stop an illegal and unjust war, the soldiers can choose to stop fighting it.”
Watada went on to point out that “Now it is not an easy task for the soldier. For he or she must be aware that they are being used for il-gain. They must hold themselves responsible for individual actions. They must remember duty to the Constitution and the people supersedes the ideologies of their leadership. The soldier must be willing to face ostracism by their peers, worry over the survival of their families and of course the loss of personal freedom. They must know that resisting an authoritarian government at home is equally important to fighting a foreign aggressor on the battlefield.”
He went on to say that “The American soldier must rise above the socialization that tells them authority should always be obeyed without question. Rank should be respected but never blindly followed.”
To someone like Bartlebee, if an officer commanded an enlisted person to jump off a mosque, that would be acceptable because a soldier’s job is to blindly follow orders. To an intelligent person that of course makes as much sense as blindly obeying an illegal order.
The lieutenant recalled a literary icon when he said “Mark Twain once remarked, ‘Each man must for himself alone decide what is right and what is wrong, which course is patriotic and which isn’t. You cannot shirk this and be a man. To decide against your conviction is to be an unqualified and inexcusable traitor, both to yourself and to your country…’ By this, each and every American soldier, marine, airman, and sailor is responsible for their choices and actions. The freedom to choose is only one that we cah deny ourselves.”
Watada reminded the veterans that ‘The oath we take swears allegiance not to one man but to a document of principles and laws designed to protect the people. Enlisting in the military does not relinquish one’s right to seek the truth-neither does it excuse one from rational thought nor the ability to distinguish between right and wrong. ‘I was only following orders’ is never an excuse.
There is not one superfluous word in that excerpt ffrom Lt. Watada’s speech. Again, the hope is that more soldiers will follow his example and those brave military personnel in the film Sir! No Sir! by saying NO to the war machine of the United States.
September 16th, 2007 at 8:08 pm“I’d go to Iraq, and shoot my rifle up in the air.”
Comment by BARTLEBEE
And end up like Tillman, when your “buddies” see you horsing around in a firefight?
September 16th, 2007 at 11:22 pm“The soldiers who fought in the german army in WW2 were no more war criminals than our soldiers are.”
Comment by BARTLEBEE
So, you’re making the case that soldiers who were subject to all the provisions of the Geneva conventions treated their prisoners the same as today’s soldiers, who only observe a sort of “Geneva Lite?” By today’s weakened standards, it would be naive to think these soldiers haven’t commited acts for which their WW2 brethren would have been held fully accountable. They may not intend to be war criminals, but the Geneva conventions can’t be unilaterally redefined by a country – any country.
September 16th, 2007 at 11:32 pm…“Geneva Lite?†By today’s weakened standards,…their WW2 brethren would have been held fully accountable.
Comment by barfly
What “weakened standards” are you talking about ? The Geneva Convention articles were not adopted until Aug. 12, 1949, and were not entered into force until Oct. 21, 1950.
September 17th, 2007 at 2:51 amSome interesting discussion about the war in Iraq moving forward took place yesterday on Meet The Press w/ Russert. You can see them here if you haven’t already:
Meet The Press – Kerry & McCain Talk Iraq
http://beta.redlasso.com/Community/ClipPlayer.aspx?i=fc90713d-4bba-4831-b134-4dd9dcf6a76d
Meet The Press – Political Experts on ’08 Election / Iraq
September 17th, 2007 at 1:04 pmhttp://beta.redlasso.com/Community/ClipPlayer.aspx?i=8ce66bd7-4ffd-42bf-b5f2-6fc5f22809e2
It’s not a possibility any more. From this mornings IndyStar 3,400 troops based in Indy are called up to Iraq earlier than originally planned.
Semper Fi
September 18th, 2007 at 9:39 ammunciecarl