This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Author: Operator Dan

  • USA Today on How Vets Feel About The Hurt Locker

    USA Today has run an article that discusses how many veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan have different opinions on the accuracy and quality of the movie The Hurt Locker. The author of article, Gregg Zoroya, does an excellent job of gauging veterans’ responses to the movie, presenting an array of opinions including those of Army of Dude and Bouhammer, who are both quoted in the article. I highly encourage you all to read the article, it is one of the few times the MSM has done a good job of reporting on how vets feel about a particular issue (albeit not a very important one).

    I personally enjoyed The Hurt Locker and thought it got a lot of things right about Americans in Iraq. In particular, I enjoyed how the movie mostly stayed out of the politics and how the insurgents were portrayed for exactly what they are: a bunch of savages who don’t care who they harm or kill in their strive to attain their goals. I felt that generally EOD’s mission was properly portrayed (a couple ridiculous adventures notwithstadning) and the opening scene in my opinion was a dead-on accurate depiction of how an EOD mission usually works.

    Of course there were many technical errors (involving everything from uniforms to rank) and ridiculous side-stories that involved EOD doing everything from helping private military contractors kill a sniper to the EOD team leader running alone through the streets of Baghdad at night. But you got to remember that this is a Hollywood movie, and there will always be a dramatic license taken with war movies.

    Overall, compared to the other trash that has come about Iraq, the Hurt Locker is a good war movie and the first real decent portrayal of Americans in Iraq by Hollywood.

  • Israel Doing What It Does Best

    Kicking ass and taking names:

    DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — Dubai police appealed for an international manhunt Tuesday after releasing names and photos of an alleged 11-member European hit squad accused of stalking and killing a Hamas commander last month in a plot that mixed cold precision with spy caper disguises such as fake beards and wigs.

    Israel is neither “confirming nor denying”  that they had a role in this. Well, I can neither confirm nor deny the sky is blue.

    I don’t think Dubai is serious about apprehending this “hit squad”. The fact is that Arab governments have about as little tolerance for the Palestinians as the Israelis do. If you look at the history of the Palestinians terrorist groups in places like Jordan, Syria, Egypt, and Lebanon you will find that the Palestinians haven’t been exactly welcomed with open arms by their “brother” Arabs. The noises about a trying to catch these guys (who are probably relaxing on a beach in Haifa right now) is just a way to appease the Arab street and radical elements in their own country.

    A job well done Israel.

  • Courtney Cook Gives Instructions on How To Be An Ass (High Blood Pressure Warning)

    Courtesy of Uber Pig at Blackfive, I give you Courtney Cook  on how to leave a soldier while he is deployed overseas:

    You’d be surprised how easy it is to leave a soldier on deployment. You can do it with a letter. (He can’t argue with you. He doesn’t have a phone.) If you lay the groundwork early, saying to the soldier before he leaves, “This will be the end of us, we might as well admit it,” it’s that much easier. The letter won’t even come as a shock.

    And if you have children with that soldier? You can handle all that with a letter, too. He’ll write it — because he cares about the kids, because he wants to work with you to do what’s best for them even though you’re leaving him — and you’ll give it to them. Here again, you will avoid a nasty confrontation. Who will they cry to? You? You’re just the teary-eyed bearer of the letter. Him? The one who’s sweating it out in the desert?

    There will be no moving truck, no boxes, no house torn asunder. The soldier is peeing in a bucket as you pack. He doesn’t care who gets the couch.

    Who did she leave her husband for you ask…

    I am married to a lithe, blue-eyed Marxist whose dissertation was on U.S. imperialism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, a man who participated in war protests in Santa Cruz, Calif., during the winter I lived at Fort Knox.

    Read the whole article and the comments some of the people at Salon have made. Here is a choice one:

    Volunteer soldiers enable voluntary wars. Why do we continue to cheer them as they get off the plane?

  • Good Riddance

    A big news story today is the announcement by Patrick Kennedy, son of Ted Kennedy, that he will not seek reelection to Congress from Rhode Island. He claims his life has “taken a new direction”.  I cannot think of a finer example of the type of human garbage that inhabits the halls of Congress than Patrick Kennedy. Here is a guy that has been elected official since the age of 21 and in his own words has “never worked a fucking day in my life” (which was uttered after he said he didn’t need the Bush tax cuts).  Almost every year, there is some new scandal with Patrick involving drugs, women, DUIs (plural), and dealings with fugitive Democratic fundraisers. Patrick also like to manufacture controversy, most recently when he claimed that he was asked not to recieve communion  by the archbishop of Rhode Island due to his support of abortion, but failed to mention that the archbishop made this request two years before Patrick’s public announcement.  Its no secret that daddy Teddy covered for little Patrick  and was able to insure all his scandals were cleaned up nicely by the media and other Democrats in Congress. Patrick also played the  “I’m depressed and bi-polar” card multiple times and used his mental illness as an excuse for his outrageous behavior. Even though we all struggle with personal demons, someone who admits to having serious mental health issues should not be continually elected to Congress but I guess thats okay if you are a Kennedy.

    However, now that Teddy is no longer around to pull strings and with polls showing his support tanking in Rhode Island, Patrick has decided to call it quits after 16 years in Congress (yeah, thats right 16 years…). It is a testament to the power that the Kennedys possessed in the Northeast that this scumbag was able to win EIGHT elections. Not only that, he was considered a serious contender to replace RINO Senator Lincoln Chafee. His announcement also reveals another new reality about American politics. Without a Kennedy holding a powerful politicial office, it shows that the era of Kennedy influence in American politics has ended. And for that, I thank God. The Kennedy family is nothing but of bunch entitled, arrogant, and corrupt trust fund babies that think we owe them because they are related JFK, America’s most beautiful (and overrated) President. What has this family really done for America? The Peace Corps? The Special Olympics? [sarcasm] Oh wow, those things have really change the course of human events. [/sarcasm]

    Good riddance Patrick, I hope we never see you or anybody else from your family in a position of power ever again.

  • ASU is not too SMART

    For those of you who don’t know, I am currently a student at Arizona State University. Yesterday, I picked up a copy of the State Press, ASU’s student newspaper, on my way to my history class. I usually read the State Press for entertainment purposes, since most of the articles are written by self-righteous 20 year-olds who think they are superior to the rest of the world since they have spent two years at ASU. In Tuesday’s issue however, there was a well-written and well-researched article about how ASU’s does not accept SMART transcripts from the military. The article and a follow-up editoral also mention how the veterans service office hasn’t been giving out accurate information on receiving credit for military experience.  This is despite the fact that ASU is recognized as “among the most military-friendly schools in the country” by GI Jobs magazine and is a member of Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges (neither  of which I had heard of until I read the article) according to the article.

    For those of you who don’t know what a SMART transcript is, it is a document that you can get from the military that lists all your military training and what type of college credit can apply to that training. For example, lets say you completed an electronics course in the military and obtained an MOS in that field. Your SMART transcript would list this training along with an equivalent similar college course and credit hours. Completing a correspondence course in basic grammar or math (like the ones offered through the Marine Corps Institute) along with leadership schools like Squad Leaders Course and Ranger School are also listed on your SMART transcript. I have never heard of any school granting credit for every course listed on a SMART transcript (and I would not expect them to either), however most at least give a few elective credit hours to veteran students. It makes perfect sense to me to give credit for military experience. Why not give a soldier or Marine who has done a deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan credit for a cultural awareness course? Why not give a Navy electronics specialist credit for basic electronics class? The answer might be obvious for some: money. The longer a veteran is using either the post-9/11 GI Bill or another educational benefit, the more money ASU gets.

    ASU is now the largest university in the country, with over 50,000 students on four campuses around the Phoenix area. Thousands of veterans are using the new GI Bill in Arizona and if they find that is easier to graduate from another one of Arizona’s universities (U of A or NAU) or community college they will go there over ASU. This would be ASU’s loss, not ours.

    I’m not at ASU for the “college experience”. I’m there to get a piece of paper that will validate my existence as a worthy human being and move on with my life.  The less time I have to spend there, the better and I think most of the other vets in my classes feel the same way.

  • The Real Deal

    The milblog community just exposed and destroyed another phony. Jonn, TSO, and everybody else involved should be proud and definitely deserve more credit (which was pretty much none) than they got in the local Houston media.

    I think its appropriate that after spending a lot of time talking about a phony hero that some time is spent talking about a real hero who legitimately earned a stack of medals and ribbons and someone who is disrespected and dishonored by fake pieces of crap like Michael Patrick McManus.

    When I was a boot PFC just out of security forces school, I had to spend eight months at Marine Barracks Washington (aka 8th and I) in order to obtain a security and weapons clearance so I could serve as part of the Marine detachment at Camp David. I was part of the guard force at the barracks and it was easily my most miserable time in the Marine Corps. The duty consisted of standing post for 12 hours on your feet with 12 hours off for sometimes weeks at a time because of a poorly-crafted security plan for the barracks. What made things particularly bad was that most (but not all) of the officers and SNCOs who served at the barracks while I was there were there for one thing only: to advance their careers. 8th and I is the home of the commandant and several other general officers and if you look at the bios of many Marine Corps general officers you will find that they spent time 8th and I. For this reason, the place attracts alot of ladder-climbers who put their own personal careers over the well-being of their Marines. Many combat decorated NCOs and Staff NCOs got thrown under the bus at 8th and I by these careerists. For these reasons, there wasn’t a lot of trust in and respect for the officers and senior enlisted leadership at Marine Barracks Washington while I was there. I was very happy to get out of that place and move on to Camp David.

    However there were a few exceptions and the most universally respected officer was Capt. Joshua Glover. When I was at 8th and I, Capt. Glover was the platoon commander of the Silent Drill Platoon. Capt Glover took care of not only his Marines in the SDP, but also Marines in other sections of the barracks. The guard force was always happy when Capt Glover was Officer of the Day. He would make a point of touring every post and spending time at each one to talk to the Marine sentries, sometimes for up to an hour. For a young PFC standing a 12 hour post by himself, this meant the world and made that miserable and lonely duty go by a lot quicker.

    Captain Glover was also a highly decorated infantry officer. He served three tours in Iraq with 1st battalion, 5th Marines, including the invasion, the first battle of Fallujah, and a tour in Ramadi. For actions during the first battle of Fallujah, Capt Glover earned the Silver Star. You can read about it here or pick up a copy of Bing West’s  No True Glory, in which Capt Glover’s actions are discussed in great detail. Capt Glover also received two purple hearts, a Navy Commendation with a V, and a Navy Achievement Medal with a V. It should also be pointed out that is likely that Capt Glover didn’t have to go back for a third tour to Iraq. In the Marine Corps, in most circumstances, after two deployments you rotate from a fleet unit to a non-deployable unit like 8th and I, the drill field, or some instructor billet (sometimes you don’t have a choice in the matter). This is done for a very good reason and helps insure that Marines get a break from the stresses of the fleet and that Marines just back from combat can train the next generation. However, Capt Glover knew that 1/5 was going back into the meat-grinder and wanted to be there with them.

    Capt. Glover receiving his Silver Star from General Hagee

    Captain Glover rotated back to a deployable unit around the same time I left Camp David for 2/1. I didn’t hear anything about him after that. Today, when I logged on to Facebook I saw a post by a Marine I served with (Dave who was with 3/8 in Afghanistan) mentioning that Capt Glover had been wounded back in November in Afghanistan and tonight he would be ringside at the UFC fight thanks to UFC fighter Brian Stann (I couldn’t embed the video but Stann talks about Glover in the fourth video from the left here). Capt Glover was wounded while participating in a rescue operation for two paratroopers from the 82nd (who unfortunately drowned in a river). There is a possibility he may lose one leg. More details about what happened can be found here at Glock Talk. This was Capt. Glover’s either third or fourth time being wounded and his fourth combat deployment.

    Captain Glover is the real deal. I hope McManus serves a long time in a deep dark hole for disrespecting men like Capt Glover.

    (Thanks to Dave and other Marines from the Yankee White community for the heads-up on what happened to Capt. Glover)

    UPDATE 02/06/2010: I received more information from a friend an fellow Marine who was in my platoon at Camp David (Steve, another Marine who is the real deal) about Captain Glover. I was wrong about some of the details about his injuries and circumstances behind his injuries. I have updated the post accordingly. Steve says Captain Glover is at Walter Reed is doing pretty well. If I get more information, I will update this post. Again, I would not have known about any of this without Marines from the Yankee White community.

  • Obama Blames Republicans For His Own Leadership Failures

    I have noticed a couple stories today floating around the internet and cable news today about Obama “ripping” into Republicans for “obstructionism. Here is a sample of a story from CNN:

    Washington (CNN) — President Obama tore into the Republican opposition on Capitol Hill Wednesday, blaming the GOP for what he called politically motivated opposition on virtually every issue.

    Democrats have been willing to incorporate Republican ideas on health care and other issues, he said, but Republicans have not been willing to do the same.

    Here is analysis of Obama’s new strategy of dealing with the Republicans from the AP. The lead-in:

    WASHINGTON – Slapping Republicans with one hand, extending olive branches with the other, President Barack Obama is playing a dangerous political game.

    It’s not a new one.

    And it just might work.

    It is clear that Obama is trying to blame the Republicans for his own inability to rally and lead his party and to cover up some of the serious ideological problems that have been plaguing the Democrats for years. The fact is that Obama and the Democrats had a supermajority in the Senate (until the election of Scott Brown) and a huge majority in the House. They were able to vote down Republican filibuster attempts during the healthcare debate, albeit with shady backroom deals (i.e. the Louisana purchase). The problem was not a lack of Republican participation in the healthcare debate (which the Democrats didn’t need or frankly want) it was discord within in the Democratic Party and Obama’s inability to lead it. There are just too many different disparate groups of Democrats in the House in Senate and I can’t think of one issue that the entire Democratic Party can rally around. On one end of the spectrum you have hard-left “progressive” Democrats that wanted in effect a single-payer system similar to what you would find in Europe (and some who refused to support a bill without a public option) and on the other end you have Blue Dog Democrats that were too fiscally moderate to support a public option or were afraid of potential funding for abortions in one of the healthcare bills. Other than some of Obama’s new “job-creation” proposals (ex: tax cuts for small businesses, increased tax credits for families etc. etc.), I can’t see the Democratic Party coming together and supporting the President on the majority of his agenda. In my opinion, since the Reagan years, the Republican Party has always had two big issues they can rally around: lower taxes and national security. What do the Democrats have?

    Obviously the President’s problems aren’t because of the Republican Party, but because of his own party’s inability to come together on anything.

  • More News On Don’t Ask Don’t Tell

    In my last post, I addressed some of the big issues concerning how the DoD would go about repealing DADT. According to an article from the AP, the DoD has apparently begun to address some of the same issues that I brought up in my previous post. I am happy to hear that the DoD is at least making the right noises in preparing for a potential lifting of DADT. Gates and Adm Mullen are also going to testify in front of the Senate Armed Service Committee on the issues facing the military in regards to DADT. I still believe (and so do most political commentators including the author of the AP article I link to) that there will not be any changes to DADT this year. The focus is obviously on the economy and the 2010 election and I realistically don’t see the Democrats in Congress or the President making repealing DADT a centerpiece of their 2010 agenda.

    My personal feelings on DADT are a bit conflicted and my mind is not completely made up on the issue. I do not believe that homosexuals should be allowed to serve in combat arms units or on submarines. I don’t believe this because I buy into a stereotype of gay men/women as “weak” or “girlie”. The living conditions in these units  do not allow for the ability to segregate gay and straight soldiers/sailors/Marines and adding sexual tension (and I don’t care what anybody says that tension will exist no matter how many people say otherwise) to an already stressful environment that exists in these combat units is a dangerous mix. These are some of the same reasons why we do not allow women to serve in combat arms units. On the issue of gays serving in other MOSes, I am not sure that this would effect the capability of some of these units. Again, I spent my four years in security force and infantry units, so my experience with non-combat arms MOSes is limited, but nobody can argue that they operate differently. I certainly don’t believe that there should be quotas for gay enlisted and officer promotions to insure that there isn’t discrimination against them. There is so many things wrong with that I don’t even know where to start with that one. The military is meritocracy (thats why many on the left dislike it) and promotions should be based on ability not on race, sexual orientation, or anything else. I also don’t believe that men and women who were discharged under DADT should be allowed to reenlist/recommission. Right or wrong, they violated a stated DoD policy by revealing their sexual orientation. The only exception I would make is the ones who were maybe involuntarily outed.  If the United States were to legalize pot, should we let everybody who was kicked out because of drug pop on a piss test? Absolutely not.

    Again, the overall point I want to make on DADT is that is far from a simple issue that can just be changed overnight. There are serious implication for our military, which is currently engaged in active combat operations all over the world.