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

Category: Support the troops

  • Arkin: Bush’s Nixonian withdrawal plan

    Remember little Billie Arkin who told us all that the troops in Iraq were living La Vida Loca and that we didn’t need to support them, they needed to support us instead? Well, the Washington Post let him out of his cage (now that mud season has ended in Vermont) and let him moderate a discussion on their “Planet War” forum. Rather than say that the President is planning for pulling the troops out of Iraq because they’re not needed any longer, Arkin blames the defeat of the US military in Iraq for the President’s decision;

    Cynics might dismiss the maneuvering as “just politics,” but in fact [Obama and Bush] are struggling with the same objective and reality: how to end the Iraq war favorably and without admitting defeat, and how to preserve the honor of the American military.

    For the Bush administration, the task is to balance success on the ground and a new yearning and confidence on the part of the local government with long-term security. And of course, there is a heavy dose of pressure from the U.S. Army and Marine Corps, who both deeply want to be relieved of the exhausting duty. Accelerating withdrawals before the elections aren’t intended to help McCain, as some have speculated. They are motivated by a desire to leave the White House redeemed, and to give the American people what they want.

    Obama, on the other hand, is not flip-flopping or changing course or doing anything in his “refinement” other than being presidential. Everyone wants to “end the war,” the question now is how to get there. I would argue that the issue is not “defeat” of the terrorists or even the kind of stability in Iraq that would satisfy a tough auditor. The universal imperative has become to preserve American military honor.

    Now, keep in mind, that Billie Arkin made this brilliant assessment from the wilds of Vermont. He makes no indication that any of it is quoted from any source or any amount of research – it’s simply his unsupported opinion…from Vermont. From Vermont, Arkin has made the decision that we’re losing in Iraq (despite the mounds of evidence to the contrary that is publicly available) and that the President just wants to pull the troops out to save their honor – like Nixon in 1972. Arkin, as in his previously famous writings, blames the military’s ineptness for this imagined failure in Iraq and blames the Administration for keeping them there to spare their feelings.

    What Arkin won’t admit is that the only reason our troops have been involved over there so long is because him and his peace-freak buddies can’t shut up while the troops do their jobs. Even after the job is nearly done, he continues to berate them.

    And, of course the commenters in the forum suffer mightily from BDS;

    Bush has always said he wants to leave Iraq, and its easier when the country you occupy doesnt want you there. Bush has had 8 years of deception and misinformation that has led us deeper then we were ever promised we would be in Iraq. So to now say that his policies are similar to Obama’s is a stretch. Obama has a record of being opposed to the war from the beginning. Any refinement is seen as flip-flopping because the press is so used to a President that doesnt change anything he doesnt want to. The universal imperative of American Military honor has not chance under Bush. His entire history of ignorance and NOT listening to the generals on the ground (contrary to popular belief) had led us to hurt our military honor. This honor can be regained by winning the war on terror in its main battlegrouns- Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is something that Obama sees as a priority and Bush has seen as a secondary to his fiasco is Iraq. So I dont see the similarities.

    (Spelling and punctuation errors are from the original author, probably the result of pounding on his keyboard in frustration at being wrong once again)

    I should probably point out that Arkin did a brief tour in the Army as an intelligence officer in Berlin (during the late 70s) and that he went to work for Greenpeace after that. Besides blathering on for Washington Post, he seems attached somehow (his email address) to the Institute of Global Communications, a “progressive community” consisting of PeaceNet, EcoNet, WomensNet, and AntiRacismNet – so there’s probably no agenda there.

    Crossposted at Eagles Up! Talon

    Welcome Conservative Grapevine readers…and thanks to DPUD for linking us up again. Welcome C.H.U.D. Busters‘ readers.

  • AFL-CIO maliciously using veterans to make faulty point

    By now you have likely seen this ad.

    [youtube IZYh0I73ldc nolink]

    Since I actually work for a Veterans Service Organization, and deal with these issues, I knew right off the bat that it wasn’t accurate. Unfortunately, I also knew that pointing that out would subject me to statements about being a shill for McCain, despite having repeatedly stated that I will either not vote for him, or vote for him like I did Hillary in the campaign, with eyes shut and nose held.

    Anyway, I didn’t post anything, and now I don’t have to, as Factcheck.org did it for me. I’ve followed Factcheck since they debunked the worst ad I’ve ever seen, that assinine Vietnam Body Armor ad by Vote Vets.

    Anyway, this is the summary of what they found:

    The AFL-CIO is attacking McCain with a TV spot saying he voted “against increasing health care benefits for veterans.” Actually, he voted for increases in those benefits. The labor federation points to McCain’s votes against Democratic proposals to increase funding. Those were defeated along party lines, and then quickly followed by alternative measures to increase benefits by smaller amounts, all of which passed unanimously or with near-unanimous majorities. McCain supported all of them.The AFL-CIO also points to a McCain vote against a war spending supplemental appropriations measure from 2007 that included additional funding for veterans’ health care, along with much else. The measure passed the Senate along partisan lines but was vetoed by President Bush. But McCain voted for a later version of the supplemental that ultimately passed into law and actually included slightly more funding for veterans’ benefits.

    If you are going to use us veterans to make a point, could you at least TRY and make it somewhat accurate? Seriously. I am the last person to claim that the GOP is better on veterans (specifically VA) issues than the Democrats, something not borne out by the budgets when each were in control, so why not just state the facts and be done with it? I expect a ton more of these hit pieces, and if their goal is to make me more eager to vote for a guy whose immigration and global warming policies make me throw up a little in my mouth, then I say unto you: Mission Accomplished.

    ON EDIT: I’ve done a little more research on Jim Wasser, the AFL-CIO guy in the video, and come to the conclusion he’s a lying crap weasel.  It should shock no one that he did a bunch of stuff in 2004 for Kerry, ostensibly to rebut the Swiftees.  Anyway, I loved this passage he has on the AFL-CIO website:

    On the veterans’ issues, everyone respects McCain’s war service. We veterans never forget other veterans and we should never say anything bad about another veterans’ military service – that’s hallowed ground.

    Mr. Wasser, you have a call from General Clark on line 2, line 2.

  • From My Inbox

    I guess everyone is getting the sense I’ve run out of stuff to write today, so thankfully, they’ve been emailing me stuff and I’ll share some of it with you here.

    DPUD sent me a link to The Drawn Cutlass who wrote about a Native American sniper in the US Army who just finished a stint in the Canadian Army and decided to switch sides (I kid). It’s a fairly fascinating story, but each of those guys who stand in the breech are fascinating in their own ways.

    My buddy D. wrote “Four Months For Victory” at The Dillard Doctrine.

    WHO/WHAT: On July 9, Vets for Freedom will hold a press conference—featuring over a dozen Iraq war veterans—to launch a national “Four Months, For Victory” media and grassroots campaign. The effort will culminate on Veterans Day (November 11) and is intended to inform the American public and key lawmakers about the phenomenal success that our troops have achieved as a result of the surge and the importance of ensuring victory in Iraq, Afghanistan and the overall Global war on Terrorism.

    The launch includes a multi-million dollar television-advertising buy in target markets and on national cable that will air next week and run throughout July and August. The first television ad will be released at the press conference featuring the Iraq and Afghanistan veterans appearing in the ad. These pointed ads are aimed at informing the American people about the truth regarding progress in Iraq and Afghanistan .

    Here’s the VFF ad I’ve had in my YouTube account waiting for someone more qualified than myself to write about the VFF;

    [youtube 4p1aKqz0_IM nolink]

    Go read the rest at D.’s house.

    Bruce Kessler at The Democracy Project sent me this link to his review of the upcoming “Generation Kill” HBO project about the a Marine unit during the initial invasion of Hussein’s Iraq. He put a lot of work into the research, and even though he hasn’t seen the movie or read the book, he’s assembled a lot of background on it.

    Jacob wants you to read about the DNC hiding the homeless people in Denver during their convention at this American Pundit link.

    In order to keep homeless residents out of sight during the Democratic National Convention, the city of Denver is giving away passes to local activities and televisions have been donated to homeless shelters.

    A plan has been developed to provide interested homeless people with free access to cultural activities. They include the Denver Zoo and the Denver Museum of Nature and Science, and they won’t have to worry about paying for transportation.

    “We’ll have bus tokens if they need them,” Parvensky said.

    Isn’t that nice? For one whole week, the homeless don’t have to worry about what they’ll do with their free time. But then, that’s the Democrats for you – just so long as they do something for the homeless in Denver while the Democrats have to see them, then the Democrats feel good about themselves. Maybe they could give them jobs at the Convention instead…a little life experience. Or buy them new styrofoam cups.

    Speaking of begging…This Ain’t Hell just got it’s first donation from one of your fellow readers. I won’t embarrass him or her but I am grateful. Thanks loads. Now what’s wrong with the rest of you?

    If you won’t send me money, at least send me tips and I’ll add them here.

  • C.H.U.D. Busters

    Our buddy,  LT Nixon,  has a new blog you should bookmark It’s called C.H.U.D. Busters and I’ll let him explain it;

    I had an idea to start a blog that is solely dedicated to the examination of people that actively dislike the troops in America.  I refer to them from here on out as “CHUDs”, which is a cheesy 1984 horror film starring radioactive humanoids living in the sewers.  This is a non-partisan effort to charecterize the different forms of people that slander our military on the internet, at protests, in the media, and in Washington.  I spent the weekend coming up with about 10 posts and hopefully I’ll be able to update once a day or so.   If you have time, I’d love to get any feedback/suggestions.

    There’s more than enough material out there, I suppose. Click on over and take a look at what a Navy officer does on his  leave.

  • Rich Davis; American Sheepdog

    My buddy, Skye from Midnight Blue sent this video along and asked me to post it. Like I’d turn down Skye for any request. But it’s about Rich Davis, whom I met briefly when I went to West Chester last month – only breifly because Rich was on the move from the time we got there until we left. But, here’s Skye’s video about Mr. Davis;

    [youtube FWgq3bJSFiQ nolink]

     It turns out that this is Skye’s entry for the GOP Convention video contest. She says she might find out tomorrow if she’s been selected for the competition. Stay tuned here for news on how you can help her get a free trip to the convention.

  • Vietnam vets at war again

    Those filthy hippie freaks of the 60s are so steeped in their self-importance, so self-assured they somehow made a difference in this country’s history, they’re back to attacking the veterans of the same era. Dodging their spittle the first time wasn’t enough, I suppose.

    It was honest-to-goodness Vietnam veterans who dealt the death blow to John Kerry’s 2004 Presidential bid. Not only did the Swiftboat Vets do him in, but a thousand or so veterans stood outside the Capitol one September afternoon and told America that John Kerry lied while good men died.

    In 2005,Vietnam veteran Michael A. Smith spit tobacco juice into the face of Jane Fonda in Saint Louis. Millions of veterans of all eras stood and cheered for Smith doing what we’d all wanted to do for so long. The Left was outraged that one of them was on the receiving end of a differing opinion – that someone would actually disagree with their treasonous, shallow opinions.

    The Left trotted out “research” that “proved” that not one Vietnam Veteran had ever been spat upon. They even created an expert out of VVAW member Jerry Lembke who couldn’t really prove it didn’t happen so he pooh-poohed it down to an urban myth – the Left, of course, gobbled up the “research” of this Ph.D. In this Slate article, he provides the unassailable proof that it never happened;

    He writes that he never met anybody who convinced him that any such clash took place.

    Well, that’s enough proof for me. How ’bout you?

    Then, the Left held their last successful anti-war demonstration in January 2007. When they spray-painted steps at the Capitol and defaced the statue at the Navy Memorial, Vietnam Veterans said enough was enough.

    2001784008875464499_rs.jpg

    They put a call out and thousands of Vietnam veterans flocked to the Vietnam Memorial two months later and formed an impenetrable human shield around “their”memorial.

    Photobucket

    Ever since then, the Left has been disparaging Vietnam veterans. I don’t know how many exchanges I’ve had with IVAW veterans who think that only their service is relevant and they’ve called Vietnam veterans fat, old has-beens. Even my buddy, TSO, an Afghanistan veteran, was physically threatened by IVAW thugs at Winter Soldier when they found out he was a member of Vets For Freedom.

    Every time the Left planned an antiwar protest, Vietnam veterans showed up to stand in stark contrast to the anti-war side. Vietnam veterans announced that what had happened to them when they were fighting our nation’s wars would never happen again.

    Support for the Left dwindled from thousands at their protest in January 2007 to hundreds at their last big event in March 2008. Now, they’ve decided that they need to focus their rekindled hate for Vietnam Veterans on John McCain.

    It began with Jay Rockefeller;

    “McCain was a fighter pilot, who dropped laser-guided missiles from 35,000 feet. He was long gone when they hit,” Rockefeller told the newspaper, which published the article on the interview Tuesday.

    “What happened when they [the missiles] get to the ground? He doesn’t know. You have to care about the lives of people. McCain never gets into those issues,” he is quoted saying.

    Then Wesley Clark, because he got away with it defending Hillary back in March, disparaged McCain’s Vietnam service using nearly the same words. It’s signaled the Left’s attack poodles that McCain’s Vietnam experience is fair game.

    My buddy, Robin at Chickenhawk Express quotes Code Pink’s Medea Benjamin;

    “I wouldn’t characterize anybody who fought in Vietnam as a war hero,” said Medea Benjamin, a co-founder of the theatrical anti-war group Code Pink. “In 23 bombing sorties, there must have been civilians that were killed and there’s no heroism to that.”

    “Anyone who can’t look back and admit how wrong it was to be in Vietnam and be killing civilians deserves to be challenged,” she said, though she stressed that her group is more focused on McCain’s present support for the war in Iraq than on his past.

    At Lew Rockwell, Michael Gaddy uses McCain’s “I’m a war criminal” confession given to his captors against McCain. At the Daily Kos, they ask “What’s so special about McCain’s service?;

    Getting shot down, tortured and then doing propaganda for the enemy is not command experience….

    But being a Harvard-educated lawyer does?

    Politico even exhumes the corpse of Vietnam activist Noam Chomsky for a quote on the subject;

    Noam Chomsky, the linguist and activist, said in an e-mail that he thought Americans should question whether McCain’s torture in an unjust war is relevant to his campaign.

    “The questions could scarcely even be understood within the reigning intellectual and moral culture — though I don’t doubt that much of the population would understand,” Chomsky said.

    Confederate Yankee writes;

    We’ve known that Barack Obama’s base among the radical fringe would bring out some long-seated uglinesses in part of the Democratic Party that makes up his base, but I don’t think that anyone could have expected it would come out this soon, this hard, this transparently.

    It’s been building for years – since they got away with disparaging Dan Quayle’s and George W. Bush’s National Guard service, it was inevitable.

  • Sunday link fest

    Time to give back to all of my friends out there;

    im_pro_zombie.jpg

    Me, too.

    Jammie Wearing Fool catches Wesley Clark trashing McCain AGAIN.

    Zero Ponsdorf disagrees with Michael Yon – just this once.

    The American Pundit finds a politician who not only defends Obama and his posse, but he defends Mugabe in the same tone.

    Ziva at Babalu Blog gets nostalgic for pre-Castro Cuba.

    Big Dog recounts the childishness of the Democrats and Baldilocks tells them to grow a pair.

    Uncle Jimbo cuts loose on the Left at Blackfive.

    Bloodthirsty Liberal has little patience for this German revisionist.

    Doubleplusundead takes on the “Dueling Dumbasses” of the Second Amendment revisionists.

    I can’t even summarize this bit of Swedish buffoonery from Rich Horton at Blue Crab Boulevard.

    To show how bi-polar the Obamists are, Robin at Chickenhawk Express finds some hunting for people who bad-mouth B?O for his middle name and DrewM at Ace of Spades finds some changing their middle name to whatever Obama’s middle name is.

    The only guy on the internet who lists me in his blog roll as “This ain’t He**”, my buddy, Steve at Common Cents helps you find cheap gas.

    Confederate Yankee catches AP in an outright lie…once again.

    Don Surber‘s Weekend Scoreboard.

    Lisa and WL MacKenzie Redux at Dust My Broom writes about Jackboot Justice in our neighbor to the north.

    Fausta says there’s a monkey god in Obama’s future.

    Wordsmith’s Sunday Funnies on Flopping Aces.

    Gateway Pundit recounts Lieberman’s charge at Obama’s throat.

    Marooned in Marin reports that Feds are investigating the City of San Francisco for harboring an illegal alien who’s also a crack dealer.

    See-Dubya explains Obama using the McMurthy Lonesome Dove story at Michelle Malkin.

    My buddy Skye at Midnight Blue is still standing against the clowns in West Chester, PA every Saturday.

    Greyhawk at Milblogs pulls back the covers on Obama’s McPeak.

    Kate at A Colombo-Americana’s Perspective has nearly-live photos of the protests in Nicaragua.

    Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs lashes out at Olmert’s deal with the Palestinians.

    The Gentle Cricket says McCain has impressed him already.

    D. at The Dillard Doctrine has advice for the pro-mission organizations – join or die.

    Stop the ACLU reports that Think Progress has resorted to outright lies – not a first for them, though.

    Last Reporter at Red Maryland and Unfree State tells the story of Baltimore’s latest corrupt-thug mayor.

    There, that oughta hold ya’all.

  • Sanity on a clueless planet

    We’ve all heard how the world stood with the US on September 11th, 2001, but somehow within a few days, George W. Bush had squandered all that goodwill and the entire planet turned against us. In less than two years, the French (who were dealing with an internal Islamic problem) turned on us, the Russians (who were also fighting Islamic terrorism) turned on us, the Spanish were frightened into turning on us by Islamic terrorism.

    Of course, it turns out that the Russians, French and Germans were profiting hugely for protecting Hussein’s regime and the only western news agency in Iraq, CNN, was purposely not reporting the truth from Iraq. The news reporting hasn’t changed – no news agency, outside of Fox wants to tell the public about the oil-for-food scandal (or as Hussein’s inner circle called it, the oil-for-palaces program).

    The American Left relishes the resulting hate for Bush’s United States, because they have no policy plans that they can tell Americans about that’ll get them votes. Clinton’s “third way” New Democrats are gone according to the Wall Street Journal‘s Kimberly Strassel last Friday;

    When Mr. Clinton left, so did the most prominent New Democratic voice. Party liberals have been reasserting control ever since. Howard Dean’s 2004 consolation prize was the Democratic National Committee. Nancy Pelosi became House Speaker in 2006, and gave back committee chairs to the old 1960s liberal bulls. And now comes Mr. Obama, the party’s most liberal nominee since Hubert Humphrey.

    So how does the world feel about Obama? They’re enthusiastic, according to Fouad Ajami in today’s WSJ;

    The Pew survey tells us that some foreign precincts show a landslide victory for Barack Obama. France leads the pack; fully 84% of those following the American campaign are confident Mr. Obama will do the right thing in foreign policy, compared with 33% who say that about John McCain. There are similar results in Germany, and a closer margin in Britain. The populations of Jordan, Turkey and Pakistan have scant if any confidence in either candidate.

    84% – that’s about the same as Washington, DC’s liberal community support for Obama. Why? Because, of course, the world wants our money. Envy is at the root of almost every policy towards the United States, envy and greed for the American taxpayers’ earnings.

    Look at the list of Obama supporters in COB6’s post below – every one of them has a vested interest in seeing America fail. Why would they not support a Obama candidacy since he’s the most likely to make us a failure like Europe, Asia, the Near East and Africa and hand out our taxpayer dollars and make us more dependent on our supposed allies.

    Who cares who the Euro-wienies want to be our President? Who cares that Turks support Obama? We Americans each support our candidates based on our personal values, what makes the outside world any different? Because they want to take smiling protraits with us? No. Because they want our money and Obama is more likely to hand over sacks full of cash to them.

    Europeans and Arabs are too damn lazy to earn their own way in the world (somehow they got it in their heads that the economy is a zero-sum game – that there are losers and winners), so they all want a piece of our country – they line up outside of our consulates around the world every morning hoping for a visa to get here, and then burn our flag either here or their own country, depending on the outcome of their visa application.

    It’s becoming more and more apparent that John McCain is becoming the torch bearer for the few remaining sane people on the planet. One final question; why would any sane American want to vote for a candidate that the French support by 84% when the French are on their fifth constitution and we’re still on our first one?