The major combat action was quick and easy, it was relatively painless, virtually bloodless, and pretty cheap. Had there been a plan for the aftermath it would have been only a brief commitment.
They were told exactly how it would go down, and it came to pass. What happened afterwards was a different story, and totally unexpected.
BTW, I’ve grown to admire my mother quite a bit. I may end up going back, and she didn’t do any hand-wringing, she just said to do what I needed to do and to come back. No gnashing of teeth, just a proud mother giving her son the best support he can possibly get from a parent.
I think I can agree with only your first statement (except maybe the cheap part). They were told that by the end of the year the vast majority of the troops would be home, the rebuilding would cost the US at most, at most a little under 2 billion, and that the Iraqis would come together in joyful America loving democracy. By which point we would have rounded up all of the terrorists and WMD’s which littered the landscape.
I know you don’t really take much account of us evil liberal anti-war types, but there were plenty of people who, before the invasion, were forecasting exactly the type of scenario that has unfolded in Iraq since Bush announced the end of the main phase of the war.
And if we are to believe the confessions of some former administration officials, there were people within the Pentagon and the administration who also had a pretty good idea of how much of a quagmire Iraq might become.
It might be accurate to say that the administration didn’t adequately prepare for the current situation, but to call that situation “totally unexpected” seems pretty disingenuous to me.
I am the unoffical person in the office to rip back a snopes.com comment to anyone who passes along a bogus email.
However, when the recent bogus email was sent out by numerous women in our office about the supposed 2005 draft, I was amazed how many “pro war” co-workers suddenly were changing their tune.
For the first time ever, I didn’t forward on the snopes. The way I saw it, it was good for these “holier than thou” co-workers to envision their own kids being sent to Iraq.
[Quote]
:
Originally Posted by amarinth
I can follow the confusion and general threads of misinformation that led to the other “facts” but I can’t twist this one into making sense… “plummers”? **
Correct. Sorry, I really shouldn’t have used their spelling. :smack:
Right now my daughter is asleep on the couch. She often moves there sometime in the night. She turned 11 yesterday. It’s a funny age. She still plays with Barbies some, but is starting to develop. She can shift from little girl to old woman in a nanosecond and I think we are headed into a couple of years of constant PMS. I sometimes try to imagine the incalculable pain her loss would bring. Even that brings debilitating grief. I know that it can’t be even close to the agony of the real thing.
Then there are my students. Wednesday is ROTC day. Probably an eighth of them are in ROTC. They look so grown up and proud in their uniforms. They mostly join because they are planning for the future. It is the way to get to college for a lot of families that can’t get them there any other way. I have to be proud with them, but I am so scared for them.
This war has had costs. I remember hearing of the family who had their son’s body delivered home on Mother’s day. There is the Iraqi family who had their 14 year old son blown up by a bomb in their roadside food stand, to the young man here in town who will never meet his own son, to Daniel Berg.
I believe Eisenhower’s son fought in the D-Day landing. I wonder what that must have been like for him each and every time he heard of casualties. I guess he had to be able to compartmentalise.
They say when you have a child your heart is ripped out and given legs. Each of the young men and women killed in Iraq held someone elses soul. To the woman that felt other people’s children didn’t count when they supported this war, I have to say Shame on You. If a war is not worth your child’s life, then it is not worth fighting. Perhaps in its own way that e-mail’s dissinformation is fighting ignorance on its own.
Sorry for the long post I have been thinking about this for a while
Vietnam and Watergate happened. We don’t say, “Son, you could grow up to be president” anymore, because we no longer consider it the best achievement there is. If people think the commander-in-chief is a statesman, the soldiers under him are seen as honorable warriors. If they think he’s a sleazebag politician, soldiers are seen as hired thugs. A fish rots from the head.
I turned 18 in 1981, the year that Selective Service registration was reinstated. Reagan was newly inaugurated and there was genuine (though maybe ignorant) fear that a Draft was very soon to come. At the time, and maybe still, only men were required to register.
I was discussing this with my Step-Mother, who has two natural daughters and no natural sons, and she unthinkingly told me that she didn’t care if there was a draft or not so long as only men were drafted. She just didn’t want her daughters to be drafted. Typical selfishness on her part. I was incredulous. Her wish would have doubled my chances of getting sent to war.
Yep. Men only. My brother had to register to get accepted into college.
I think if they did bring back a draft it’d only be fair to draft women as well.
I remember feeling distinctly paranoid after 9-11, which happened a few months before my brother’s 18th birthday. I was afraid if things really went wrong and a draft was instituted, he’d be of age for it. He’s in the Air Force now, but he’s doing computer programming. The chances of his getting sent off somewhere bad are incredibly low.
So, there’s talk the draft might be reinstated but it’s just a legend; a rumor right? Then, why do young men still have to register with Selective Service? Something to think about huh?
Mr Moto brought up a very interesting point when he mentioned that you don’t see many veterans in the mainstream American workplace and I think that is quite true. And the workplace that has an incredible dearth of veterans ? The Bush Administration!!! John Ashcroft got a draft deferment (during the Vietnam War) because his job of teaching law in Missouri was deemed essential to the United States.
Our own Vice President Cheney didn’t go in the military (even though there was a draft AND a war) because he said he had “other priorities”. Gee, I didn’t know you could use that as a draft deferment.
AND our Commander In Chief - George Dubya Bush spent the Vietnam War fearlessly defending the Texas borders from those all too frequent Vietcong invasions. Also, he moved ahead of a long waiting list line to get into the Texas National Guard. (Must have been his eagerness to defnd El Paso from enemy invasion).
Just to be bi-partisan, our previous Commander-In-Chief didn’t go to Vietnam either.
Also Howard Dean, another Democrat, had a medical deferment for a bad back, yet he was seen skiing the slopes of Colorado.
By now I’m sure just about everyone here has seen the “chicken-hawk” websites about tough-talking politicians, celebrties, etc who are all for war but who NEVER went themselves. Read about these “brave souls” - John Wayne, Ted Nugent, Rush, Limbaugh, Jack Kemp, Charlie Daniels, etc. And sorry for not respecting the dead but our recently deceased 40th President Ronald Reagan spent his WW2 military service making army training films in Los Angeles.
I’ve noticed that since the end of the draft (1973), American patriotism has been running high. Nice to see kids shouting “USA” so proudly when they don’t have to defend it. (Or as someone else said people flying American flgs from their SUV’s). I wonder how fervent that patriotism would be if the draft came back.
Think I’m really going to get trampled for this posting so feel free to pounce.
Nope. No pouncing. Just a request to be careful how broad that brush is when you start painting. Not only do I shout “USA” but I’ve already been over to the Sandbox and recently put my name in to go back.
Not everyone is a “Chickenhawk”. Some of us genuinely think we’re doing the right thing, and of that group we’re all volunteers.
Gee I did not mean to create the impression that my posting was anti-military or anti-veteran. No just the opposite. I appreciate what veterans have done for America. (the 60th Anniversary of the D-Day invasion was just last week and it was interesting (as always) to hear the tales from that eventful day. Especially the stories from Omaha Beach.)
My point is that I really don’t like the folks that talk tough but never do the fighting. As I’ve said on the SDMB before, I’d like to see Dick Cheney go to the Vietnam Wall and tell the visitors that while their (father/brother/son) was getting killed in Vietnam, he “had other priorities”. Or I’d like to see Jack Kemp explain that he couldn’t go to Vietnam due to a medical deferment but he somehow mustered up the courage to play professional football for the Buffalo Bills.
As far as patriotism, flying the flag, shouting “USA” - fine with me. But I am bothered by people who are “sunshine patriots” or “summer soldiers” (as Thomas Payne called them). Very willing to fight, as long as they don’t have to go into the military, do the fighting, etc.
A recent tragedy was Pat Tillman with whom I am sure you are quite familiar, but for those who don’t know him, please click on this link: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2004/football/nfl/04/23/tillman.killed/
Walking away from a contract worth millions to fight and unfortunately die for his country. Incredible person.
Well, I hope I’ve cleared things up a little. And Airman, since you said you are going back to the “Sandbox”, I wish you the best of luck, as I’m sure you are well aware, war is a dangerous endeavor.
If you can post to the SDMB when you are at the “Sandbox”, I think a LOT of SDMB folks would like to hear that you’re doing okay. (without giving away any military secrets of course).