Category: Antiwar crowd

  • An Exception to Every Rule.

    Once a Marine, always a Marine, or so the saying goes. Congressman Murtha is the exception to that rule. Marines have an awesome Esprit de Corps, they think there is nothing that they can’t do, just because they are Marines and you aren’t. They say “Gung Ho” and mean it, they are hard chargers.

    Jack Murtha, on the other hand is not, he isn’t a hard charger at all. Here he is AGAIN saying the US cannot win in Iraq militarily. “Look at all the people that have been displaced, all the [lost] oil production, unemployment, all those type of things,” said Rep. John P. Murtha, chairman of Appropriations defense subcommittee. “We can’t win militarily.” It is that old self-fulfilling prophecy thing again, no, you can’t win if you don’t try to, and it is clearly harder to win when the congressional “leaders” keep spouting off in the press that it is impossible for you to win.

    How is it, that in 2000 Al Gore and Company accused George W Bush of “Talking down the economy” and that was supposed to be some kind of horrific thing to do, but when Murtha and his congressional Dopes (er Doves) tell us the US military cannot win, that is not supposed to have any impact on the morale of the troops or the people of the US.

    The one thing Americans have always excelled at is exceeding the expectations of others. I am sure the court of King George III thought “They can’t beat us…” But, they did, and soundly. There were those who said man would never fly, but, the Wright brothers did that. Americans can do anything we set our minds to do, and no number of pantywaist ex-Marine congressmen will change that, no matter how much they try. But, he supports the troops! (Like a rubber crutch…)

  • Lazy Sunday Links

    I’m fighting off a cold or something and I’m not thinking straight so I’m going to let other people do my thinking for me today;

    Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs illustrates that 60s hippies never die in “You went there to kill children, you’re a baby killer

    Robin at Chickenhawk Express tracks the money that links Murtha and the Haditha investigation here and here.

    Beth of Blue Star Chronicles’ son is still in Baghdad and Sergeant Grumpy just got there recently and is already dealing deadly blows to our enemie’s efforts.

    Michele Malkin has the admission (with audio) from Democrats that S-CHIP is the backdoor way t get universal healthcare past America while we blink.

    Gateway Pundit has a threatening and demeaning letter from Amahdinajad to M. Sarkozy.

    Wild Thing at PC Free Zone has the story on OPEC’s fear of a devalued dollar – they thought the camera was off. Speaking of oil, Junkyard Blog’s SeeDubya writes that Citgo is now funneling oil money to Chavez’ social programs.

    Crotchety Old Bastard answers his email for ANSWER.

    Babalu Blog’s Alberto de la Cruz reports on Chavez’ toe-dipping into extra-Venezuelan military operations.

    I’ll be back later if I can shake this thing.

  • Washington Post; nonpartisan my pink butt

    So the House passed the same stupid defense spending bill that was vetoed by the President and sent it to the Senate AGAIN. The Washington Post didn’t bother to post the story on it’s website until nearly noon today and they entitled the piece “Senate GOP Blocks $50B War Funding Package” (Ed. Note: They changed it last night to; “Funding Bill for Iraq War Falls Short in Senate Vote”) pushing the culpability for the failure of funding off on Republicans;

    By Shailagh Murray
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Friday, November 16, 2007; 11:44 AM

    Senate Republicans blocked the latest Democratic effort to end the Iraq war, rejecting a $50 billion funding package that would require President Bush to begin withdrawing U.S. troops.

    The 53-45 vote fell seven short of the 60 votes needed for the measure to clear Republican procedural hurdles.

    But wait – what’s this:

    A GOP alternative, which would have provided $70 billion with no strings attached, failed 45-53, or 15 votes short of the 60-vote threshold.

    Oh, so the story’s title could have been “Democrat Caucus Blocks $70B War Funding Package” just as easily – or even “Senate Fails to Fund War”, but neither of those would fit the WaPo’s editorial policy.

    In another Washington Post story, Pelosi blames Congress’ low approval ratings on the Senate;

    In an interview at the U.S. Capitol, Pelosi said the Democratic takeover of Congress had raised expectations on action to end the conflict in Iraq, and that the Senate’s initial willingness to tackle immigration reform followed by its failure to do so left the American public disappointed in Congress.

    The House on Wednesday night passed spending legislation that sought to tie funding for the Iraq war to hard deadlines for beginning troop withdrawals, a proposal that has little hope of passage in the Senate.

    “People thought it was a problem that could be solved and when it didn’t happen I think it was a big disappointment,” she said. “Usually those low numbers relate to expectations and there were high expectations” on both Iraq and immigration.

    Maybe Congress’ low approval ratings are because Democrats made promises they never intended to keep. They need the war to win next year – all they have to do is keep sending legislation they know will be vetoed to play to the whacky wing of the Left. Don’t believe me? Let’s go back to the first WaPo story;

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) said he may bring the Democratic bill back to the floor in December, but he and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have asserted that Bush would not receive more war funding this year unless the president accepts Democratic withdrawal terms.

    Why would they continue to send legislation that was dead on arrival if they intended to end the war? And Washington Post carries their water for them.

  • Where’s the war? (UPDATED)

    Reading the usual newspapers and wire services this morning, I was surprised to find that there’s no mention of the war in either Iraq or Afghanistan. D’ya think we’re weary of the war and that’s why the Washington Post doesn’t even have it’s usual link to the US casualties on the front webpage? Nope, I don’t think that’s the reason at all. The war is beginning to go the way it should have gone four years ago. But that doesn’t stop Democrats from yapping. From the Washington Times’ S.A. Miller and Sean Lengell;

    Top Democrats yesterday rejected reports of U.S. military progress in Iraq, saying victory remains “out of reach” as long as political divisions roil Baghdad.

    “It’s not getting better; it’s getting worse,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat. “The goal remains out of reach.”

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, said the reduced violence in Iraq wasn’t enough to win her support for the mission.

    “Certainly any time our military is engaged in military action, we want the best possible outcome for them, and they have produced that,” she said. “But their sacrifice and their courage has not been met by any action on the part of the Iraqi government.”

    Pelosi is talking through her ass, by the way. If they’d wanted “the best possible outcome” for the troops, they would have shut their stupid mouths four years ago until the job was done – then they can yap to their hearts’ content.

    So what’s it take to convince the Democrats that the war is being won? Yesterday the Iraqis took up one of their most controversial issues, the inclusion of former Ba’athists in the political process – the equivalent of Germans letting the former Nazis back into their process.

    From the Times article;

    Sen. Joe Lieberman, a hawkish Connecticut independent, said the war critics “remain emotionally invested in a narrative of retreat and defeat, even as facts on the ground show that we are advancing and winning.”

    They’re not “emotionally invested”, Joe, they’re politically invested in defeat. They have no emotions beyond their fear of being shown to be fools by Republicans.

    “Democrats can’t acknowledge the fact that our troops are winning the war against al Qaeda in Iraq without admitting that they’ve been dead wrong on the biggest national challenge of our generation at the same time,” said House Minority Leader John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican.

    “Had Republicans not stood their ground and prevented Democrats from forcing a retreat — on numerous occasions, especially in the early months of the year — who knows how firmly entrenched al Qaeda in Iraq would be today and what kind of strikes they’d be planning,” he said. “It’s a scary thought that could have been a reality.”

    Make that “most Republicans” – some greasy little cowards scrambling for that “maverick” label, cough-Hagel-cough, capitulated to the Left for purely political reasons.

    The Democrats want to encourage massive US casualties in the middle east, they want to encourage Iranian and al Qaeda strikes against the US – then they can use them in the 2008 campaign. Why else would Pelosi, et al. visit Iran’s poodle, Syria? To make the Arabs think we’re a bunch of cowards and fools – to insure them that no matter what they do to us or our allies, we’ll just turn the other cheek for them.

    Why else would Harry Reid continue to say that the war is lost, that surge wasn’t working even before it started? Because they’re a bunch of traitorous cowards who’ve bet their careers against the United States ever being successful at anything. They keep their jobs as long as they can convince voters that our revolution was a fool’s errand, as long as they can convince voters that we’re all failures.

    America used to be about winning. Fausta lists the 19 terrorist attacks against the US that have been thwarted since 9-11-2001. Gaius at Blue Crab Boulevard says, “The Democrats may spend their days paddling up and down denial, but the reality is that trying to lose in Iraq is not a good strategy for rebuilding America’s foreign relations.” Chickenhawk Express quotes Harry Reid’s latest trip down denial;

    Take for instance, Harry Reid’s comments today about the war in Iraq…

    “Every place you go you hear about no progress being made in Iraq,” said Senate Democratic majority leader Harry Reid. “The government is stalemated today, as it was six months ago, as it was two years ago,” Reid told reporters, warning US soldiers were caught in the middle of a civil war “It is not getting better, it is getting worse,” he said.

    Makes ya wonder, doesn’t it? Now contrast Reid’s words with these words from Michael Yon, someone actually on the ground in Iraq (h/t Wake Up, America);

    I can’t remember my last shootout: it’s been months. The nightmare is ending. Al Qaeda is being crushed. The Sunni tribes are awakening all across Iraq and foreswearing violence for negotiation. Many of the Shia are ready to stop the fighting that undermines their ability to forge and manage a new government. This is a complex and still delicate denouement, and the war may not be over yet. But the Muslims are saying it’s time to come home. And the Christians are saying it’s time to come home. They are weary, and there is much work to be done.

    Doesn’t sound like they’re talking about the same war, or even the same country, does it?

    Perhaps the media quit reporting on the war because they can’t get it right. Confederate Yankee reprints a letter that an Army LTC wrote to the Guardian to straighten out one of their reporters.

    UPDATED: The Senate failed to pass the bloated, same old stupid Democrat trick of trying to set a withdrawal date for Iraq while holding the troops hostage with defense spending – the same stupid political ploy that’s failed four times this year (link to AP/Yahoo story);

    Four Republicans joined Democrats in voting for the measure: Sens. Gordon Smith of Oregon, Olympia Snowe of Maine, Susan Collins of Maine and Chuck Hagel of Nebraska.

    Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., was the lone Democrat opposing it because he said it did not go far enough to end the war.

    The Republican proposal to pay for the Iraq war with no strings attached failed by a vote of 45-53, which was 15 short of the number needed to go forward.

    Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said this week that if Congress cannot pass legislation that ties war money to troop withdrawals, they would not send President Bush a bill this year.

    Instead, they would revisit the issue upon returning in January, pushing the Pentagon to the brink of an accounting nightmare and deepening Democrats’ conflict with the White House on the war.

    In the meantime, Democrats say, the Pentagon can use some of its $471 billion annual budget without being forced to take drastic steps.

    “The days of a free lunch are over,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

    So, the party that claimed to be the party of fiscal responsibility won’t pass a defense bill in the time of war. And blithering buffoon Lil’ Chuckie Schumer – the king of free lunches – doesn’t give a tiny rat’s ass about funding the troops as long as he can run over Congressional aides to get to the cameras and say “the days of a free lunch are over” to get his stupid goofy mug on TV.

    If you stupid ass Democrats send this incompetent bunch of boobs back next year, you deserve everything they won’t give you. More on the Senate at Crotchety Old Bastard,  Michele Malkin, Blackfive and Gateway Pundit.

  • …but they still support the troops

    I caught a quick flash on the news last night about protesters at Denver’s Veterans’ Day events, but it took me until this morning to check the news, because after my own activities yesterday, I just didn’t have the energy to spend on those goofballs. But here’s the story from Denver’s Channel 7 news;

    Hundreds of people lined the streets in downtown Denver Saturday morning to watch the city’s annual Veterans Day Parade but it was not without some conflict.

    One Gulf War veteran, who only goes by the name “Cougar,” lost both of his legs in combat. As he was being pushed down the parade route, he broke into tears.

    “It’s nice … We never got this treatment. Not until now. We deserve it,” he said.

    Supporters waved flags to the beat of the drums, and cheered on the veterans as they marched by.

    At the very end of the parade, though, several anti-war veterans groups were met with mixed emotions.

    They carried signs protesting the Iraq War and President George W. Bush.

    “We support the troops. We’ve been the troops. We believe the best way we can support them is to get them out of there,” said Frank Bessinger, a Vietnam veteran who organized the demonstration.

    Um, Frank, this is about all veterans who’ve served in all wars. I visited the Tomb of the Confederate Unknown Soldiers – a mass grave of more than three hundred soldiers aside Robert E. Lee’s former mansion on Arlington – and paid my respects to people who’d died 90 years before I was born. You and your goofy group of misfits were making it political.

    Denver’s Channel 8 reports they were banned this year for their behavior last year;

    Organizers of the event say Veterans for Peace was not invited because the group staged what they considered an inappropriate protest at last year’s parade.

    Andrew Grieb of the United Veterans Council of Denver says the parade is not a platform for protesting, but rather for honoring veterans of all services.

    But Vietnam vet Frank Bessinger says the exclusion of the group violates freedom of expression.

    Um, Frank, it wasn’t a government function, so you have no freedom of expression to disrupt it – the Bill of Rights protects us from the government not from each other.

    I don’t like the “Veterans for Peace” moniker, either – it implies that I’m a “veteran for war” – and that’s certainly not the case. I’m for peace everywhere, but I’m enough of a realist to recognize that there are times thugs need to be dealt a forcible blow so they understand that peace is more advantageous to them than war. Even that knucklehead Clinton understood that up to a point.

    But the Veterans for Peace were busy yesterday, they also made a splash in Boston. The complete and unvarnished coverage from Boston local Bloodthirsty Liberal and the blotter report from the Boston PD News blog.

    Of course in Maine, they arrested veterans for busting up smelly, ignorant hippies’ anti-war propaganda (Ed. Sorry, I just noticed the date was two years ago);

    “I’m saddened that it has come to this, but I have a responsibility to maintain public safety,” said Police Chief John Morris, a Vietnam veteran. “Veterans don’t behave like that. These people don’t have a right to destroy other people’s property. Legitimate veterans’ organizations don’t commit civil disobedience. Veterans died to allow freedom to exist — whether we like the message or not. ”

    On Oct. 30, the peace group, Waterville Area Bridges for Peace and Justice, placed the white flags at the park, accompanied by signs protesting the Iraq war.

    On Wednesday, with Veterans Day looming, some veterans called the display a “desecration” and a “disgrace,” threatened to forcibly remove the flags, and challenged the police permit that authorized the display.

    On Thursday evening, about eight people — Bridges for Peace members and their sympathizers, among them some veterans — gathered at one side of the park, not far from where about 10 protesters were preparing to yank the flags.

    Veterans’ Day is as much for the living as it is for the dead – we take down Christmas displays, we dismantle all kinds of things that supposedly “offend” certain protected species of Americans – why can’t we do that for the patriots in this country instead of tossing them in jail? I’m sure the left has no problem with what happened in Kansas, though (link to TIME);

    Almost as soon as Ann and Don Bender marked the 4th of July by planting a field of more than 3,500 flags — one for each of the American troops killed in Iraq— the elements began to take a toll. The baking sun and sudden storms of a Great Plains summer left the little flagsticks warped and broken and the fabric bleached and torn.

    But that was nothing compared to the damage done in the dark hours of Sunday morning by vandals who kicked down thousands of the flags and left behind a cardboard sign with a single word splattered in red spray paint: “MURDERERS.”

    “You’ll have to excuse me, sir, for crying,” said a big bear of a man named Andy Enders as he stood by the remains of what had been “the most beautiful memorial ever created by private citizens, in my opinion.”

    Leftist bloggers think Veterans Day means remembering the mewling masses of protesters. Cindy Sheehan thinks Veterans’ Day is an opportunity to explain Jesus’ politics. But then what should we expect from a bunch of emotion-driven, irrational, sexually-frustrated self-serving children who’ve never known a moment’s discomfort, or understand the real meaning of sacrifice. Maybe they should take the time to read this short but elegant blog entry from Debbie Mumford on the subject.

    Veterans’ Day is ABOUT the troops – it’s not about the government. If you can’t take one day off from your irrational emotional outbursts and support the troops on Veterans’ Day, you can’t claim to support them rest of the year, either.

  • Do Democrats know we’re laughing AT them?

    While catching up with stuff, I read with interest the story on Rick Moran’s Right Wing Nut House about whacky Dennis Kucinich’s pandering to the Far Left Pro-defeat crowd by sponsoring impeachment articles against Dick Cheney;

    Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich expressed satisfaction Tuesday with a series of procedural twists on the House floor that resulted in the Ohio congressman’s impeachment articles against Vice President Dick Cheney being sent for committee review.A series of strategic maneuvers on both sides of the partisan aisle ended with a 218-194 vote along party lines to deliver the impeachment resolution to the House Judiciary Committee, the panel of jurisdiction for such matters.

    “This vote sends a message that the administration’s conduct in office is no longer unchallenged,” Kucinich said after the vote.

    Yeah, that’s what it does, Den. I guess if he figures he can act crazier than Ron Paul he can raise $4 million in one day, too, just by tapping the raving lunatics constituency (Kucinich supporters sound exactly like the pauliens, too). Moran continues that it’s not really a victory for Kucinich as he’d like us to believe;

    Republicans, changing course midway through a vote, tried to force Democrats into a debate on the resolution sponsored by longshot presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich. 

    The anti-war Ohio Democrat, in his resolution, accused Cheney of purposely leading the country into war against Iraq and manipulating intelligence about Iraq’s ties with al-Qaida.

    The GOP tactics reversed what had been expected to be an overwhelming vote to table, or kill, the resolution.

    Midway through the vote, with instructions from the GOP leadership, Republicans one by one changed their votes from yes to kill the resolution to no, trying to force the chamber into a debate and an up-or-down vote on the proposal.

    At one point there were 290 votes to table. After the turnaround, the final vote was 251-162 against tabling, with 165 Republicans voting against it.

    “We’re going to help them out, to explain themselves,” said Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas. “We’re going to give them their day in court.”

    So, Kucinich got his vote through because the Republicans are calling his bluff – to make him look foolish. Well, more foolish than he was looking last week as reported by The Gentle Cricket, anyway. 

    Moran says it best, though (as usual);

    The exquisite irony of watching Democrats fall all over themselves trying to kill impeachment after spending most of the last 7 years accusing Bush/Cheney of the most dire impeachable offenses was almost too delicious to watch. It showed the Democrats to be shallow political hacks, eager and capable of using rhetoric to undermine the presidency during a time of war but without the balls to match their actions to their words.

    Well, that’s not the end of the story, by any means. DUmmie FUnnies trolls the depths of undrained swamps to bring us these nuggets as Mad Dennis leads the nation’s whackiest over the cliff;

    “Dennis Kucinich just announced on the Ed Schultz show that John Conyers will hold hearings into the impeachment of Cheney. A full House vote yesterday would never have succeeded and would only have endangered red-state Democratic House members. But hearings could do the trick. I’ve been saying all along: Follow the Nixon impeachment playbook.”

    “I hope its true, last I heard from Conyers was they were discussing it, and then Wexler came out for it. Maybe Conyers listened to him and us.”

    “I doubt Articles of Impeachment will pass unless evidence of wrong doing is put forward and gathering that evidence seems to be not so easy. “ 

    They’re cute when they’re at their koolaid drinking best, aren’t they? The “Nixon impeachment handbook”? What the Hell is that? Nixon was never impeached. Oh, and I’m sure Conyers is listening to you – it’s real apparent that he’s not listening to anyone with any common sense – that leaves you.

    I doubt articles of impeachment will pass either – and my doubt has a lot to do with evidence, too. There is none – there’s only a bunch retards enamoured with the sound of their own voice and the echo they get from places like Democratic Underground.

    But, it turns out there are even whackier people with whackier theories than on DU;

    I propose a third, far more likely reason why the Democratic shmucks in congress won’t impeach Bush and Cheney.

    Nancy Pelosi, an ardent zionist, was told that Cheney must remain exactly where he is because Bush simply can’t launch another war before he leaves office without him – he’s too f*cking stupid.

    Conyers and the rest of them “won’t cross Pelosi,” not because they’re afraid of her sorry ass, but because they’re afraid of AIPAC, which will come down like a ton of bricks on anyone who dares impede their insane plans to launch a war against Iran.

    Of course, we all knew that somehow it was the joos. Still others see it as an opportunity for Ron Paul;

    Once again, this is a commanding moment for Ron Paul in influencing the direction of the nation by joining with Democrats to look more sharply upon the deeds of the current administration.

    Others don’t understand why Congress doesn’t bend to the will of 23% of Americans in a CNN poll.

  • Lieberman: Democrats Beholden to Hyper-partisan Paranoid Base

    The Financial Times
    Joe Lieberman finally slams the kook base. No, he isn’t telling us anything we don’t know, but, it is refreshing to see someone who was (and really is ) a prominent democrat Speak Truth To Kooks. The 2008 Democratic candidates are beholden to a “hyper-partisan, politically paranoid” liberal base that could endanger the final nominee’s chances of winning next year’s presidential election, Joe Lieberman, the former vice-presidential Democratic candidate, said yesterday He went on to note:“[Today’s Democrats] are inclined to see international problems as a result of America’s engagement with the world and are viscerally opposed to the use of force – the polar opposite to the self-confident and idealistic nationalism of the party I grew up in.” While it is nice to see some honesty from a democrat, don’t expect this to become widespread too soon. The kook fringe donates enough money that the DNC will cater to them for the foreseeable future.

  • Phony soldiers; things I can get away with writing

    I’ll begin this with some background for the first time readers who will not have the energy to bother checking my “About” page before they email me with their false outrage. I spent twenty years in the Airborne and Bradley Infantry – I wore maroon, black and green berets all within the first six years of my career. I volunteered last year to go back on active duty – after being out for 14 years – because my country asked me. My son is currently an Air Force Staff Sergeant on active duty, my father was in the Navy during the Korean War, my niece (Army Reserve) and her husband (USMC) were both tapped for active duty service Iraq. All of my friends are or were on active duty. I have no friends who haven’t been on active duty. I’m no “chickenhawk”. Period.

    So why did I say all of that? Well, I just finished reading the latest at Chickenhawk Express and it got my blood boiling and I’ve got some things to say that I can get away with, while people like Rush Limbaugh can’t get away with saying.

    There’s a common thread that runs through all of these IVAW folks – they’re proven liars and sociopaths. This one that Robin wrote about, Clifton Hicks, is no different. At Hick’s IVAW “Back to Baghdad” fantasy tale about his so-called service in Iraq, he starts out telling lies;

    I grew up in Savannah, Georgia, right near Fort Stewart, and I’ve always remembered what a big deal it was when 3rd ID came home in ’91.

    If Hicks remembered the 3ID coming home, he lived in Germany because that’s where the 3ID called home at the time. The 24th Infantry Division came home to Fort Stewart in 1991. Anyone living in Savannah, Georgia at the time would have known that. The people in Savannah loved their 24th Division – many of the members of that division were from Savannah. Hicks is lying.

    So we get treated to more lies about this cumbubble’s so-called service;

    We were tucked away in the shittiest part of the base, behind two concrete walls and a canal, about a mile and a half from all the luxurious MWR facilities that we either weren’t allowed in or never had time to visit. We occupied old Iraqi Army barracks that besides being poorly built were of course plagued by rats and giant camel spiders who pestered us relentlessly. We lived off of junk food, MRE’s, and the rancid, fly ridden slop from our DFAC when we were desperate. A health inspector actually came by one day and demanded that our DFAC be shut down, but the Squadron Commander and Sergeant Major fought it and they stayed open.

    That, my friends, is an outright lie. No commander, nor sergeant major, would tolerate unsanitary conditions in their mess hall. No squad leader, platoon sergeant, first sergeant would tolerate it. Mess sergeants are proud of the way they can feed nourishing food anywhere under any conditions. “Rancid, fly-ridden food” would never get to a soldier’s mouth. Having been an Infantry Platoon Sergeant, I know how important chow and sanitary conditions are to the successful completion of the mission.

    Now let’s look at this picture from Hick’s photo gallery at IVAW;

    Hick’s calls the photo “My First Notch” implying that as an M1 driver, he killed the driver of the vehicle with his tank. The only problem is that the photo is taken from the gunner’s position on the M1. If there is indeed a dead person in that car, and if indeed the M1 killed him, the photographer wasn’t driving the tank.

    In another interview, Hicks described “the wedding incident”

    Hicks is haunted by his activity in Iraq. He talks about what he calls the “wedding party incident.” His unit was on patrol when they heard shooting between US armed forces and what they thought were Iraqi insurgents. While Hicks prepared to go house to house in search of the enemy, what he discovered instead was a wedding. Some of the men had been shooting rifles into the air, as is customary during family parties and celebrations. Three people from the wedding were shot; a six-year-old girl was killed. When the platoon sergeant called the command center to report the incident, “all they said to us was ‘Charlie Mike,’ a stupid Army acronym for continue mission.”

    So, if that’s true, why didn’t Hicks report it higher? We all know what happened at Haditha when innocents were killed. If Hick’s conscience is bothering him, why doesn’t he give testimony to the incident instead of just yapping like a yorkie?

    In Hick’s Letter to Vets for Freedom;

    How come nearly every single one of you people that I’ve seen or read about are Lieutenants and Sergeants? When I look at your little war pictures and read your poorly written bio’s my vision is overflowed with images of lazy, incompetent, cowardly Officers with a handful of brain-dead NCO’s to do their dirty work, as usual. I wonder where you boys all served?

    So only Hick’s service can be considered heroic, I suppose. Anyone else was just a pogue. Funny, but while I served in the Infantry, I thought Cav pukes were pogues – the difference between me and Hicks; I grew out of it and honor everyone’s service.

    I have to snicker, though. He calls VfF members’ bios poorly written and then writes the awkward “…my vision is overflowed with images….” phrase. Editorial kharma got him.

    I suspect that Hick’s application for CO status stemmed from something more than what I can find. Some kind of childish misbehavior that he was trying to escape. I’m sure I’ll find it eventually – because there’s always a backstory to CO filings – in a volunteer military, people of coscience just don’t join.

    I had a soldier transferred to my platoon from another company where he had misbehaved. When he found out how tough life was going to be in my platoon, he threatened to file as a concientious objector unless we transferred him back with his buddies. I, of course, told him to file – I didn’t give a tiny little rat’s ass what the little punk did. But the sergeant major caved and transfered him to appease the little punk. The soldier went to the war and came back – so much for the “conscience” part of being a CO.

    Another soldier – the commander’s driver, if I’m not mistaken – went AWOL the morning we were scheduled to deploy to Iraq. When he called the commander, he claimed to be a CO – but it turned out that he just didn’t want to leave his German girlfriend unsupervised. He did 18 months at hard labor for thinking with his “other” head.

    Adam Kokesh, whom I’ve written about extensively here, was busted for smuggling an Iraqi pistol back from the war. Hardly the actions of someone who “questioned” the war. It was only after the Marines busted him a rank and then denied him the opportunity to return to Iraq did he suddenly decide the war is immoral.

    Lt. Ehren Watada, the youngster who volunteered for the Army didn’t become a CO until he’d been in the Army for three years – joining after the war in Iraq began. The little known fact is that Watada’s father had been a draft dodger during the Vietnam War. So, a logical person could conclude that Watada had joined the Army just to demoralize the troops – and to insure Democrat support in future elections.

    Those are the phony soldiers – the guys who turn their sociopathic behavior into something marketable to the eager press willing to pay in exposure and feed the phony soldiers’ need for attention. But attention away from their crimes and misbehavior, portraying themselves as noble men, when the truth is that they are nothing more than snake oil salemen.

    Scumbags all. These people don’t understand the concept of “selfless service” because in every action they take, it’s all about them. That’s why there are no conscientious objectors anymore – just a bunch of self-promoting morons with bouts of John F. Kerry syndrome.

    And yes, because they don’t think like me, they’re wrong – because they don’t want the war in Iraq to end. If the war ends, they’re just another footnote in the history books and maybe a “where are they now?” interview in twenty years or so.

    UPDATED: I forgot to add the link to The Sniper where my new buddy Thus Spake Ortner inspired this whole Hicks thing (from me, Robin and lately, GI Jane) in the first place. Compared to TSO and Robin, my rant is just a footnote.