Tuesday, January 23, 2007


I received this email from a friend. The Iraq war may be seen on TV as just another Political Debate, Political Argument or Political One-upmanship but to the ones who are really involved in the incredulous sadness and hardship it is anything but... How long must we be involved in a mistake? How long must those who least deserve it be on the receiving end of this slaughter? How many of our brave young people must come home in a box or maimed for life.


Please read the words below and listen to Bruce Springsteen's sorrowful cries of lament through song. thinkingblue


Saturday, 25 U.S. troops were killed in Iraq, Sunday, my daughter-in-law's convoy was hit by a suicide car-bomber in Afghanistan, with minor injuries to those in the convoy, and I want to scream or cry and say "Enough! Enough!" but instead have written this as my inadequate mea culpa... our loved ones who serve. - A Sad Mother -

...the United States Army's at war,

the United States of America's at the mall...

Army officer at Ft. Leavenworth,KS

The above quote is from the most recent episode of NOW on PBS,
Back to the Front. The program explores the emotions experienced by
soldiers at Ft. Stewart, GA, as they prepare to leave their loved ones and return
again to Iraq, and can be viewed in it's entirety at the link above.

The quote was related by Lt. Col. Andrew Krepinevich, Jr., USA-Ret., in the following (paraphrased) quote:

...A friend of mine went out recently to talk to group of officers at Ft. Leavenworth in Kansas, and during the course of his presentation he said, 'The United States is at war,' and at that point one of the officers cut him off and said, 'No, sir, the United States Army's at war, the United States of America's at the mall.' And the other officers began to nod their heads...

The mall the United States needs to be at next Saturday is the one in Washington, DC, between the Capitol and the Washington Monument; So, if you can't be there, write a letter -- write three letters -- to your members of Congress and send them along with someone from your area who is going, to pass on to MFSO members who will be visiting Congress.- A CONCERNED FRIEND -

Really support the troops -- use the Constitutional rights
that they swore to uphold and defend, and Speak Out!

Write letters!

Make phone calls!

and say:

Bring the Troops Home Now!

Bring the Troops Home Now!

Bring the Troops Home Now!

If the above plug-in does not work... CLICK HERE

Lawrence O'Donnell
Rangel Is Right

Charlie Rangel is angry about the Iraq war, the one that Henry Kissinger has
told us we can't win. Thanks, Henry, but most Americans figured that out before
you did. Rangel saw combat in Korea. Kissinger has only seen combat on TV. That
might have something to do with why Kissinger thinks our troops should stay in
Iraq even though we can't win.

Kissinger says that if we leave now, all hell will break loose and Iraq will
never achieve stability. Never mind that all hell has already broken loose.
Never mind that Kissinger said the same thing would happen if we left
Vietnam--all hell would break loose and Vietnam would never achieve stability.
Vietnam has become so stable that Presidents Clinton and Bush, both combat
cowards during the Vietnam war, have made well publicized, utterly safe visits
to the country Kissinger used to think didn't have a chance without us.

In my one conversation with Kissinger, which occurred on TV, I asked him if he
knew anyone who got killed in Vietnam. He was completely thrown. He doesn't go
on TV to be asked such small-minded questions, he goes on TV to pontificate and
TV interviewers are happy to let him do it. Kissinger sputtered and ran away
from the question, leaving the distinct impression that he did not know anyone
who was killed in the war he managed. His memoir of the period does not mention
a single casualty. If you have ever stood at the Vietnam Memorial and run your
hand over the name of a relative on the wall, as my mother and I did last month,
you can get as angry as Charlie Rangel does about people like Kissinger deciding
how long our soldiers should be exposed to enemy fire in a war we know we can't

Rangel announced on Sunday that he wants to reinstate the draft. He said the
same thing a few years ago but quickly let on that he wasn't serious. He's
playing it straight this time and has already introduced a bill. Local New York
TV news has given Rangel saturation coverage. You can see his anger and
frustration building each time he answers another reporter's question about the
draft. The point he keeps repeating is: "There's no question in my mind that
this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially
on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a
draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids
from their communities would be placed in harm's way."

Rangel could never get such attention to that message without introducing his
bill. Nancy Pelosi should let it come to a vote. She should let the House debate
the draft. Let the Republicans give speeches listing all the good reasons why we
should have a volunteer Army. But let's hear Rangel's speech about how the
burden of war is not fairly shared in this country. Let's get America thinking
about exactly who is being left in the line of fire in the war Americans have
turned against and know we can't win. Let's get America thinking about John
Kerry's line about Vietnam--who is going to be the last soldier to die for a
mistake? A real debate on the draft will do that. Don't worry, the bill has no
chance of passing.

Well over 95% of Americans, including Congress and White House staff, have no
personal connection to this war--no relative or friend serving in Iraq. Over 99%
of us have made no sacrifice for this war--we have not paid one more penny of
taxes nor shed a drop of family blood. One of my military relatives thinks of it
this way: "The American military is at war, but America is not at war."

Advocating war is easier when you and your family are not endangered by it. I've
reached a Rangel-like breaking point with my TV pundit colleagues who championed
the Iraq war and now say we can't leave even if we went there for the wrong
reasons. For every one of them, I have a simple question: Why aren't you in
Iraq? Or why did you avoid combat in your generation's war? The one unifying
characteristic that all of us men in make-up on political chat shows share is
fear of combat. Every one of us has done everything we can to avoid combat or
even being fitted for a military uniform. Just like George Bush, Bill Clinton,
and Dick Cheney, we are all combat cowards. It takes a very special kind of
combat coward to advocate combat for others. It's the kind of thing that can get
you as angry as Charlie Rangel.

Also on thinkingblue blogspot


CAROLYNCONNETION - I've got a mind and I'm going to use it!

thinkingBlue blogspot