EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
Popular content
Today's Top News
In This Mission Impossible, Politics Kills Soldiers
The Maine Chapter of Military Families Speak Out (MFSO) has been providing DVDs and articles to members of Congress to help them understand our increasing concerns about the safety and mission of our soldiers.
Two of the articles are by Gen. William Odom: "Why America Must Get out of Iraq Now" and "Victory is not an Option." Gen. Odom was head of Army intelligence and director of the National Security Agency under Ronald Reagan. Everyone who wants to understand what is at risk should read these articles.
The present commander in Iraq, Gen. Petraeus, recently said there is no military solution in Iraq. A political solution may someday be possible, but it is too late for what he says is the primary task of any counter-insurgency: Ensuring the security and well-being of the civilian population. The most recent poll showed 78 percent of Iraqis want the U.S. out and are in favor of targeting U.S. troops, who are seen as occupiers. Two million Iraqis are refugees, and almost that many are displaced within Iraq.
The president promised almost two years ago that "when the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down," but the Iraq Study Group reported that, in spite of the billions spent, there was never any provision to adequately fund training an Iraqi army. More recently, it has been revealed that Saudi Arabia, home of Osama Bin Laden, is funneling funds to terrorists — fellow Sunnis — to increase ethnic violence against Shiites, and that the U.S. administration promoted this!
The recycling of troops back into combat, the high rate of post traumatic stress disorder, serious combat injuries, and the neglect in treating them, demonstrate that the needs of our military personnel are not being properly considered before, during or after their service. The military has reached the breaking point in manpower and equipment. Add to this the growing revelations of mismanagement, fraud and war profiteering and it is easy to understand that the supplemental funding does not "support the troops".
The funding has most benefited the weapons industry, whose CEO income has skyrocketed to an average of over $7 million per year! The value of Cheney's Halliburton stock options has not merely doubled or tripled but multiplied by a factor of 32! We ask Congress, and every American, why should anyone get rich off the blood of our soldiers?
A U.S. Marine Corps maxim is "Never reinforce failure." It is a betrayal of our military to demand further sacrifice while condemning them to planned failure! So why is Congress still funding this disaster instead of showing leadership?
Rep. Tom Allen announced his intention to approve more war funding, once again failing to back up his claim to be "against the war." The funding issues a blank check, with no accountability. More ominously, an amendment requiring the president to consult Congress before making war against Iran was removed.
Democrats call it "Bush's war", but it never could have happened without the consent of Congress, and they will own it lock, stock and gun barrel with the passage of another funding bill. Both Republicans and Democrats have shown higher loyalty to their parties than anything else, and so, it is politics that kills our soldiers! It's past time for Congress to show some of the courage they blithely demand of our troops.
Gen. Odom says it is already too late for some 2008 presidential candidate to retrieve the situation. "If Congress cannot act, it, too, will live in infamy. Will they continue to fund the occupation and profiteering instead of the safe withdrawal of our troops? We urge our senators to truly support our troops by refusing to fund a mission that has never been defined, never been justified and so, cannot be accomplished.
Not one more day, not one more dollar. Bring them home now and take care of them.
Carole Whelan is the Maine state coordinator of the Maine Chapter of Military Families Speak Out.
© 2007 The Bangor Daily News
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
7 Comments so far
Show AllGeneral Odom merits a big salute for his candor as a citizen soldier. He, along with military professionals such as General Shinseki, Andrew Bacevich, William S. Lind and many others have spoken out long and loud about the tragic folly of Bush's Middle East campaign.
They make a great common cause with antiwar groups like Military Veterans Speak Out, Iraq Veterans Against the War, Code Pink, United for Peace & Justice, Gold Star Mothers, Sojourners, and Veterans for Peace (I'm a member).
To paraphrase Delphic Donald Rumsfeld, you end a war with the leaders you got, not the leadership you wish you had.
Tragically, the current White House occupant appears hell bent to run out the clock as the sports metaphor terms it, leaving his mess to be cleaned up by others so the peace makers can be blamed for the bloodletting and accused of betraying the troops.
So what are the options?
Here's an exhaustive conventional wisdom list of possible strategy choices, as I understand it:
1. Impeach Bush and Cheney, and have President Pelosi order the troops home.
2. Cut off all the funding, so the troops come home when they run out of bullets, bombs, fuel, blood plasma, food, toilet paper, and other essentials needed for survival in the middle of a nasty civil war.
3. Target funding cut offs and future appropriations, so the White House and Pentagon can play clever accounting tricks to circumvent the targeted restrictions, while accusing the Congress of undermining and micromanaging the battlefield authority of the field commanders.
4. Pass binding or nonbinding resolutions calling for withdrawal, and/or setting a series of obtainable or unobtainable benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet while fully funding the Bush war effort, in order that Bush and Maliki can be blamed and held politically accountable for everything.
5. Concentrate on efforts to elect an antiwar President to take over for Bush when he ends his second term and rides off into the sunset, leaving it all up to the new President to clean up the mess.
6. Reach out in a spirit of bipartisan compromise to George Bush, in hope he can finally be persuaded to change course and give up his dreams of oil, empire, and perpetual military/CIA influence over Iraq.
7. Overthrow the Bush regime by means of mass protest, civil disobedience, general strike, or armed rebellion.
8. Crawl into bed, assume the fetal position, and pull your blanket over your head until late January, 2009.
Military Families Speak Out certainly would rightfully point out that ending the occupation of Iraq is deadly serious business, so I apologize for some of the cynicism or efforts at humor slipped into the above list. But if anyone out there in cyberland does see a real world option I've missed, please post it up.
In all sincerity, this is where this somewhat rambling exercise points.
Each one of the foregoing strategies or political tactics or partisan alternatives should start with and would benefit from one simple, straight forward legislative act:
Congress should repeal the 2002 Authorization for Use of Force joint resolution. Period.
The nation then has a clean domestic slate -
no more prattle about the sanctity of the UN Security Council, nonexistent weapons of mass destruction, fictional Saddam-Osama connections, the evils of the Baath Party's police torture state, or imminent looming threats to America's domestic security coming from Baghdad. That's all past history, and a shamefully embarrassing history at that.
So repeal it. Tomorrow.
If Bush and his political base cannot put into writing and pass a new Authorization for Use of Military Force with a mission statement for those deployed in Iraq that a majority of American people can support, then the troops must come home because there's simply no longer any legal basis for them to remain.
Repeal the AUMF. Once you cross that threshold, each one of the options above becomes more feasible.
Bill from Saginaw
When we finally redeploy out if Iraq, our Army troops and Marines will not be the ones who "lost" Iraq.
The Bush-Cheney administration and their cronies created this disaster with their apparent conspiracties and desire for war.
Fore more on this:
"'Mistakes' or 'plans' in Iraq, War on Terror?"
PopulistAmerica.com
February 12, 2007
http://www.populistamerica.com/mistakes_or_plans_in_iraq_war_on_terror
- - -
"Victory of Courage, Fellowship and Honor"
PopulistAmerica.com
December 17, 2006
http://www.populistamerica.com/victory_of_courage_fellowship_and_honor
"...it's already too late...to retrieve the situation." Whether it's Iraq or Global Warming, what chance have we of pulling the fat out of the fire? Sure, our fingers are going to get burned - they already have in Iraq - and a lot more will be lost in Iraq, if we don't get out as quickly as possible.
Just look back on the history of our country;the civil war,the spanish-American war,Korea,Vietnam and Iraq;both wars!Then tell me that karma is not a bitch! Tony
Our government is committing horrific crimes and the rest of the world sees the American public putting up with it. We must look like a rogue state to the rest of the world. And it's not as if it's too dangerous to speak out against this atrocity being committed in our name. Yet.
But if we're such a free country, then why, if 70% of Americans wanted to have Ralph Nader in the 2000 presidential debates, was he still barred from them? Are you sure this is a free country? Remember the corrals for protesters when Bush came to town?
I'm starting to agree with ezeflyer, representative democracy isn't much of a democracy. The problem with electing people is that in giving them power, they forget who is serving whom.
So let's get busy. Let Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic National Committee, state committee and local chapter know you will not vote for president any candidate who does not advocate an immediate end to this war. Write letters to the editor. Persuade your friends to join you. So far, everyone I've talked to has agreed with my rationale for repudiating the Democrats. Some are timid about taking such a bold step, but they do see that without it nothing will change. So, I'm giving them time to get used to the idea. They're pretty anchored in the idea of a Democrat winning the presidency, but I say, for what? To get more of the same?
kathyodat...
***So let's get busy. Let Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic National Committee, state committee and local chapter know you will not vote for president any candidate who does not advocate an immediate end to this war***
I 2nd your emotions, with the added remark: Amid gestures that there will be a complete withdrawal of all military hardware and closing of bases from the entire region.
Best Wishes and Hope
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk1vEuhBuEU