Public criticism helps the Iraqis? WTF?!

The BBQ Pit
1

According to this article, Anita Blount, the wife of 3rd Infantry commander Gen. Buford Blount, has told the wives of the soldiers in that unit that publicly complaining about their husbands’ absence could hurt the war effort by encouraging Ba’ath Party loyalists to continue their guerrilla war against American troops.

Basically, she told these people, who haven’t seen their husbands since January, to shut up and sit down.

Now, I’m willing to accept that marrying a servicemember involves a lot of sacrifice and flexibility. After all, our spouses joined up with the knowledge and expectation that they would have to deploy, attend weeks or months of training away from home, work long hours, and generally deal with a lot of unpleasantness that is unique to the military. Most spouses understand this and accept it. It’s part of the territory.

There is a difference, however, between accepting the challenges of military life and being expected to swallow a load of shit. The 3rd Infantry wives are being asked to swallow a load of shit. They don’t want to swallow that load. Mrs. Blount, in effect, is telling them to open their mouths.

Having been through this myself, I think these women are very courageous. They’re not getting satisfactory answers out of anyone, and so they’ve chosen to take their concerns public. It’s their right to do so. All they want is for their husbands to come home. They’re not asking for the world. They’re trying to accomplish this in the best way they know how, which is to call attention to their situation, and to keep it in the daylight.

Likewise, I think laying the responsibility for the Ba’athists’ guerrilla tactics on the heads of the wives for complaining publicly is gutless and cowardly. It’s the job of the commander’s wife to look after the well-being of the spouses of the servicemembers under her husband’s command. Belittling them isn’t doing that.

I think Mrs. Blount owes these women an apology, and I think she ought to use her position as the commander’s wife to help these soldiers get home to their families. She owes them nothing less.

Robin

2

Yeah I read that earlier, I think on CNN. I thought she needed to take her foot out of her mouth.

3

Somehow I don’t think that complaining does anyone any good, especially publicly. I think it’s fine to express a desire for your husband or whoever to return home soon is fine. I would agree that it is not appropriate for military spouses to use the media as mechanism for venting their fears and frustrations.

What is this, 1950? IMHO, the commander’s wife has no more business discussing military matters than the CEOs wife has discussing corporate strategy.

4

Somehow I don’t think that complaining does anyone any good, especially publicly. I think it’s fine to express a desire for your husband or whoever to return home soon is fine. I would agree that it is not appropriate for military spouses to use the media as mechanism for venting their fears and frustrations.

What is this, 1950? IMHO, the commander’s wife has no more business discussing military matters than the CEOs wife has discussing corporate strategy.

5

Isn’t this the same “criticism of the war will only help Saddam Hussein” crap we got from the pro-war Bushistas earlier?

6

Wait there’s more. Granted there are rules about complaining against superiors, but sheesh, way to support the troops.

7

They’re also going after the GAY CANADIAN reporter who filed the story.

8

Exactly the point i was about to make.

It would be interesting to know whether any of the wives now campaigning to get their husbands back were the sames ones criticizing war protesters only three or four months ago for undermining the cause.

9

Its not the Iraqis they’re worrying about, its the Americans. There is anger and frustration bubbling upwards, from that stratum of working-class folks that GeeDubya has no contact with, other than tipping. His handlers labor mightily to polish his folksy image, but its a load. GeeDubya is about as “down-home” as his Daddy. (Remember his blather about pork rinds and country music?)

In truck stops, beauty parlors, and trailer parks the people are talking. Talking about their son, thier daughter, their neighbors boy, some friends from church. Talking about reading between the lines of thier children’s letters home. They couldn’t care less about faulty intelligence, or WMD’s. They care about the people they love who aren’t on thier way home.

The military has always regarded wives and dependents as some bizarre life form, incomprehensible and mysterious. When you’re a hammer, you view all problems as nails, so they try to solve it with gung-ho attitude and appeals to patriotism. And, of course, dark hints that someone who complains, rightly or wrongly, is unworthy, weak, not a team player.

I spent a large part of my childhood as a military brat. I remember my Mom laughing out loud at the latest mimeo’d drivel outlining the military approach to domestic life. She was a proto-feminist born just a shade too early with a wit that could shave leather.

MsRobyn, I suspect, is made of similar stuff, the more so for the generational difference. American women have changed, so necessarily have military wives, and there is some shit they will not eat. The men who were 2nd looies when I was a kid are generals now, and they haven’t learned a damn thing.

Its this bubbling up of inchoate, inarticulate anger and frustration that threatens the Bushistas. Not the intelligence reports, the lies and half-truths, the position papers. Johnny hasn’t come home, and neither has Jane, or Pablo, or Tyrone…

Sometime tonight, Karl Rove will wake up in a cold sweat. Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.

10

That is the single most un-American thing I’ve ever heard. “Don’t express your actual concerns and opinions, because the people we’re fighting might learn that we’re not fanatics singularly devoted to our goal no matter how high the cost.” As mhendo said, it’s reminiscent of the bullshit about protesting the war harming our ability to pressure Saddam to give up his WMDs.

You can’t keep the unpopularity of a war secret and still have a free society, period.

11

This is the cost of a free, volunteer army.

If we still had the draft, it’d be like it or lump it.

12

T’hell with that.

I thought the whole point of the war was to spread democracy and freedom everywhere. Doesn’t that include freedom of speech? Or is that only allowed when convenient or profitable for the administration in power?

13

General Blount is already in trouble with Rummy over his widely-quoted “This isn’t the enemy we wargamed against” comment in the early days of GWII.

It’s Blount’s 3rd ID who were the spearhead of taking Baghdad. They thought they were done, would be home by July…err September, rather at least a year…or maybe more. The troops are pissed off and rightly so.

General Blount will likely take heat for what his soldiers said, frank and honestly, when asked by TV media to put into words the dejection apparent from the still-photos. I hope he prevents any career-ending actions the Pentagon calls for.

General Blount should have blasted “CiC” Bush’s dumbass, bellicose “Bring 'em on” taunt.

14

I apologize for the hijack, but I wonder…

The name “Blount” goes back to the late 16th Century. There was a Colonel by the name of Blount serving QE2. Could the lineage have come this far?

15

When I married Airman, I don’t recall actually raising my right hand myself and swearing to defend the United States at all costs. I certainly don’t recall being asked to give up my fundamental freedoms as an American. I may have skipped that briefing, though. :rolleyes:

That said, elucidator has it right on. The military culture as it pertains to spouses is a throwback to the Fifties. Spouses are expected to support their servicemembers no matter what. The unspoken rule is that we’re expected to keep our mouths shut, put on a brave face, and keep a united front no matter what the situation. This means that the squadron can treat our husbands (and wives) like dirt, and we’re powerless to do anything about it, lest we make our spouses persona non grata. Even when I was in the Navy, sailors with “difficult” spouses found themselves shunned and in an uncomfortable spotlight. This usually gives most people pause before undertaking a public campaign critical of the military.

I dearly hope that General and Mrs. Blount face a talking-to by the Army. They won’t, of course, but these two are on my list of all-time cowards.

Robin

16

I strongly disagree. The media is their only mechanism. If the public is totally unaware of what they are going through, the military can ignore any and all complaints that the spouses have.

17

I still think that people still needs to watch what they say publicly and be aware of the message they are sending. If they expect the government and the American public to be influenced by their words, isn’t it reasonible to expect our enimies to be influenced as well.

People don’t think that there are consequences for their statements. People believe what they see on TV and I for one wouldn’t want to say anything that I thought might endanger someone fighting overseas.

That said, I don’t think people should be punished for speaking their mind. But just because you have the right to say whatever you want doesn’t mean you always should.

18

Sorry, your final mealy-mouthed qualifying paragraph doesn’t make the rest of your post any less asinine.

Exactly what consequences might there be? There are attacks going on in Iraq right now, and there have been ever since the war started. Do you really think that a whole bunch more Iraqis are going to hear about this and think, “Hey, a few of the soldiers’ wives want their husbands back home; why don’t we get some guns and see if we can drive them out”?

You crap on as if these women were giving away secret locations or army strategy or something. And, while dribbling, you completely fail to take account of the fact that the US government and armed forces have made it very clear that the troops are there to stay until the job is done.

Now, let’s weigh up the two sources, shall we? A few army wives vs. the US Commander in Chief and the whole armed forces command structure. Take a wild guess as to whose viewpoint will prevail. I mean, if hundreds of thousands of Americans marching in the streets didn’t stop the war, why would the Iraqis believe that a few American army wives can stop it now?

Of course, you pretend in your last paragraph to support free speech, and will probably argue next that free speech gives you the right to criticize the opinions of others. But there is a qualitative difference between critcizing someone’s argument on the one hand, and telling people that they simply shouldn’t be saying something on the other.

19

The urgency to squelch this kind of criticism is not strategic, it is one hundred percent political. The image of thousands of Army wives protesting US policy is enough to make Karl Rove wake up screaming.

This is precisely why the US is going, hat in hand, to beg help from the UN. Bush desperately needs an influx of foreign soldiers (and, of course, money) so that he can withdraw some American troops, he craves giving speeches before crowds of adoring soldiers like a junkie craves heroin.

As a partisan politico, one part of me hopes that the UN tells him to take a hike, you broke it, you fix it. As an American, however, I have to hope they will help and help massively so that our troops can come home, the sooner the better. I have little doubt that Fearless Misleader will rush to take credit and cast himself as Grand Marshal of the Victory Parade. And I fully expect to rush to the bathroom to make the Yawn That Splashes.

20

Well, Sec-Gen Annan appears to be taking the ‘sure we’ll help, as long as we get to turn the country over to the Iraqis in six months’ line. That should give them heartburn down at 1600 Penn.

And if that didn’t…this sure will.

I know it’d keep me up nights.