those who've served honorably and come home to begin new lives in a nation they risked their lives to defend

That's where I lost interest in this article... perpetuating the myth that the soldiers are DEFENDING the country in any way shape or form. What they are defending is corporate profits. Nothing honorable in that.

Pistonbroke at 9:25 am

Good point. It is reminiscent of what Tony Benn wisely noted in the film Sicko when he said that in Europe the government fears the people but in the United States the people fear the government.

What I can't understand is why the 9/11 false flag has never been exposed and why so many are still believing the fairy tale. Is it this victimhood that one poster quite rightly suggested, do most Americans consider themselves victims, if so it's not foriegners but their own government they should fear.

Where did this idea come from that the US military won WW2. For starters the USA was making a pile selling stuff to both sides until Germany declared war on the USA. Britain and Russia defeated Germany. Britain and the USA, mostly the USA defeated Japan.

As for these so-called vets most are social misfits who can't hold down a job for various reasons so they take the easy option, killing foreigners.
They're no more worthy of consideration that anybody else who commits or helps to commit murder but in the USA they're hero's. A foreigner looking at America sees a sad misguided nation brainwashed with religion and war dancing.

When US citizens stop worshipping god and the military that will be the day it reaches maturity.

Then we have this Democracy propaganda from the USA which has never embraced democracy, if you doubt it ask a black person or ask a socialist. What the USA has is two ruling parties one extreme right wing and the other right wing.

Few veterans of the US wars of this century have any benefits, for they are mostly Iraqis and Afghans.

No nation's military has come close to killing more US citizens than the US military. Why can't we remember this?

Memorial Day was initially created to remember the horrific cost of the second major domestic war in US history. Yet we forget why it was fought: half the US decided to kill to preserve slavery.

GwNorth at 11:01 pm

Good point. Carl Boggs and Tom Pollard discuss this topic in some depth in their relevant and important book The Hollywood War Machine: U.S. Militarism and Popular Culture.

One reason I think so many attacked for daring to suggest that what happened on September 11th was blowback, is that the United States seems to have built its entire history around the myth of victimhood. Its Governments, its institutions and its people seem to spare no expense in acting out its victimhood to the world at large. 1776 and its revolution was as much about the Colonists anger at the crown for closing off the lands west of the colonies to expansion, as it was about "taxation without representation". They wanted the freedom and the liberty to plunder the land from the peoples who lived there.

Remember the Maine, Pearl Harbor, The Lusitania, September 11th, all of them endlessly repeated in story and myth so it appears to the World that the United States of America is always the aggrieved party and only forced to resort to violence because they are wronged.

Movies like a "Red Dawn" are a very obvious example of this but the theme is repeated in a wide swathe of moves like "The Deer Hunter" and "The Patriot".

TJ: I misunderstood. I thought you meant the soldiers should have fought harder IN Vietnam to come to this illusory status of "winning." My apologies.

ERROLL: Do you remember the scolding given to those who suggested we consider WHY our nation was attacked on 911, how the right wing described that as "giving therapy to our enemies." Empathy is a spiritual understanding of other, it is a form of love and the opposite of intolerance. It takes lots of hate and intolerance to make for war; and ours is a war state. Empathy, akin to the premise of Venus in the astrological pantheon is the antithesis of Mars, although the two were considered consorts as opposites often do attract.

So, bottom line; those serving do have an obligation to discern the validity of the mission. We serve them, by encouraging them - one by one - to stop serving in illigal occupations, both. Period.

Long live the Constitution! It's time for a march. How about the Fourth of July!!

GWNorth at 05-23 at 6:51 pm

Extremely well said. It would appear that the last thing that so many Americans have ingrained in their DNA is the word empathy. In television and in films, for example, one rarely sees and hears the point of view of the victims of America's aggression. One of the exceptions to this rule is the 1974 Oscar-winning documentary Hearts and Minds which presented the grief and suffering of the Vietnamese people, as well as the physical and psychological trauma that was inflicted upon America's soldiers. Unfortunately, more films of these kind will probably be needed as the United States continues to wreak more death and destruction upon more third world countries around the globe.

Thomas More May 23rd, 2008 6:34 pm -- "They serve because they go where our armed forces are directed to ..."

As did their fathers and grandfathers before them, many of whom fought and died to oppose the fuhrer principe and the notion that blind obedience and unquestioning loyalty constitute honorable conduct. In fact, we hung more than a few people who espoused that viewpoint.

I have difficulty seeing how we can honor people on the basis that they've done whatever they were ordered to do without dishonoring the sacrifices of at least some of their forebears.

continually amused;

Defending ones wife or family is an acceptable thing to do. Why do you think I argue otherwise?

Of the wars fought in the Twentieth Century however, not a single one was justified, nor were they justifiable. WWI was fought because an empire (Austro-Hungary) decided war was a good way to respond to an act of terrorism. Launcing the war against terrorism at the start of the twentieth century led to the demise of 3 empires and the fatal weakening of the other two. Worse yet, the suffering caused by that war led directly to WWII. WWII, in W. Churchill's opinion, should have been called the 'unnecessary war'. Had a just peace been negotiated in Paris 1919, the second war would not have been fought.

WWI was a folly. All those who died did so in vain. All the treasure spent was wasted. It was based on lies, and fed by propaganda. WWII was much the same, Foch (the General who led the French armies in WWI) called the treaty of Versailles a twenty year truce; he was off by 64 days.

Korea was fought because the Soviets thought that the UN would fuck it up. By in large, they did fuck it up and that war has not ended with a peace treaty.

Vietnam. Read Tuchman's March of Folly.

Gulf War. Saddam was suckered into it after the us ambassador told him the usa had no interest in a fight between Iraq and Kuwait. Yet another war based on lies and profit.

The profitable invasions. How many countries has the usa invaded since the end of WWII? How many governments did your CIA overthrow? Was that number greater or less than the wars and revolutions launched by the USSR?

Now, at the start of the Twenty-First Century, another empire wannabe is fighting a war on terrorism. Not as bloody as the one we had in 1914, - yet - but the end result is likely to see the end of another empire.

Being continually amused and in favour of using war to settle disputes between nation states will lead to nothing more than the end of mankind. But there will not be a second comming of a 'god' to bring humanity back to life should we render the planet uninhabitable by nuking each other till we glow.

There seems to be a "thing" about all these Memorials. Some 60 years after Pearl Harbor there still a Pearl Harbor day, and I expect in 50 years time they will have parades and moments of silence to honor those that died on Sept 11th.

Heres a new twist. Why not a memorial to all those people killed in illegal invasions.? The wall needed just for the Vietnamese would dwarf the wall dedicated to US Veterans.

Put down some 2 million names. Add in the Cambodians, and those in Laos . Then have an inscription detailing why these people had to die and why it was so very important that those 58,000 on the Vietnam Memorial to Veterans had to kill the 2 million plus on the opposite wall.

It has still not been explained to me by any Government.

souixrose:

i was talking about fighting harder against wars of occupation. i didn't say anything about tactics. maybe fight was the wrong word, but when the vietnamese and other southeast asians were fighting for their lives, and u.s. military were fragging officers and hundreds of thousands were in the streets in the u.s and abroad eating teargas and taking beatings (or getting shot down in places like kent state, etc), it seems to me like fight is a correct word. i have worked for many things in this life, like my daily bread, and our daily bread, and against militarism and exploitation; but when somebody puts a gun in my face or clubs me and the people around me for exercising rights of assembly and free speech, i will fight in my individual and our collective self-defense.

continually amused May 23rd, 2008 6:13 pm -- "Arvy, WHOSE authoritative?"

Concerning UN Charter provisions, I would consider the Secretary General's statements to be quite authoritative: "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view and from the charter point of view it was illegal."

But, if his understanding of the UN Charter doesn't satisfy you, there are plenty of other discussions on the same topic. Go ahead and Google for yourself and pick one that you do like. My point was that it does NOT require waiting for the other guy to throw the first punch, but it does require a truly imminent threat of attack in order to claim "pre-emptive" self-defence as justification.

whatfools May 23rd, 2008 1:12 pm

Amen! And may his mother find her peace.

First let me say that Iraq is and was an unjustified operation. Both the fight and the occupation.

That has nothing to do with the veterans coming home, their treatments or benefits. It has nothing to do with your political preferences, ideology or personal preference in serving.

They serve because they go where our armed forces are directed to, this time by cowards that never served, and would probably run at the first shot. I know I wouldn't want to go up the trail with Wolfawitz, Cheney or Rumsfield watching my back.

Its been suggested that they have no honor. To you that said that, you are the ones with no honor. Anyone that would suggest that cowards that would send other men in their place to fight because they "changed their minds" or "think its wrong" are hero's, have no honor. Those men that deserted their brothers certainly have no honor. The time to consider if something is wrong is before the fact, not after.

These boys and girls have earned respect and especially if they didn't want to go, but went anyway, they have certainly served with honor. A lot aren't coming home. If any of you can't see your way clear to honor them on Memorial day, honor those that came before them and the ones they left in the field, honor those that bought you what you have now and have enjoyed all your lives............be in no doubt what I think of you.

FOXETRADER: Right on!

TJ: Fight harder? Are principle, right cause, just war, REASON irrelevant? Vietnam was as much a scam/sham as the Iraqi debacle. The only REAL thing is that so many are murdered for delusions of madmen and those without the integrity to question the motives enough NOT to show up. Of course the draft was not unlike a prison sentence cast over young men in the Vietnam quagmire. But fight harder, as in "to win"? WHAT does winning look like? When no human "enemy" is still standing? When the US claim to another nation's resources goes unimpeded?

ACC: You nailed it!

As much as it may be rather appetizing, I will at this time resist making any mention of our role in Iraq, the falsehods surrounding our entrance into the country, the mishandling, the cost of lives and billions of taxpayers money.

Well, If I don't make mention of any of that, what do I really have to say today.

Seriously, while I can appreciate Mr. Galloway' intentions in his article above, I caution anyone with regard to whatever means you might deem proper to celebrate this Memorial Day and honor our veterans, dead or alive.

It would appear, by most recent developments outlined on MSNBC this morning, that anything of a military nature, requires the approval of Senator Audie Murphy (Ooops, I meant to say John McCain)

Because of the fact that he served during the Vietnam war and was most unfortunately imprisoned by the North Vietnamese for approximately 5 years of his military service, he is now the sole authority on any and all that pertains to the military.

Following an address to the Senate yesterday by Democratic candidate Barack Obama stating that he could not understand McCain's opposition to a bill concerning veterans' benefits, said something to the effect that with McCain's previous military experience, which he respected, the Senator should be even more understanding for its need.

This was followed by a video clip of McCain (the backdrop did not indicate that he was in the Senate chamger) stating that if Obama did not serve in the military, he was not qualified to make such judgment.

Pat Buchanan, one of the co-hosts on "Morning Joe", a staunch conservative himself, voiced his disapproval of Sen. McCain's remarks.

Even more vocal on the issue was former Tennesse congressman Harold Ford Jr., a recent addition as MSNBC politcal analyst. Ford said that the bill in question was one co-authored by Senator Jim Webb (D-VA). and that he understood that McCain was opposing it because he had a veteran's benefit bill of his own that differed from that of Webb's.

Ford said that it was McCain's place to state that he would refrain from supporting the Webb bill and explain why his own would be better, instead of using the occasion to take a cheap shot at Obama.

While I am watching of course, I strongly suspect that McCain supporters are saying that the only reason Ford is coming to Obama's defense is because both men are black.

This whole political campaign has been a disaster and I promise you it will get a lot worse before it gets any better..

Iraq and Afghanistan vets can gain honor by educating themselves thoroughly, denouncing the high crimes of the commander in chimp, his masters, cronies and enablers, getting themselves out of military service ASAP, disconnecting themselves from the fascist establishment, and helping enlighten their fellow Americans abut the quagmire they are in.

Learning is a process.

Many vets, myself included, learned through the process of war why we should be and were apposed to it. Many vets, while still serving, were actively organizing against the war. This was called "the war within the war".

After returning home many joined with the peace movement and continued to fight against war, at the same time educating themselves as to the cause of war.

Simply, war is for profit. War is capitalism's oxygen.

Honor the peacemakers, for they want to put people's needs before profit.

continually amused: perhaps you can afford to take serious discussions in that spirit because you think being amused makes you superior. Your Marine friend acted correctly, given the situation. But pre-emption when faced with four men hassling his wife is a far cry from "pre-emption" in a country half-way around the globe that had already been bested in one war, weakened by a decade of sanctions, bombed nearly constantly for that decade, then "invaded" based on lies. We could've waited for hell to freeze over and Iraq would never have attacked us. The young men and women we sent there have been hurt, both physically and mentally, for no reason at all. Even those physically fine will bear mental and emotional scars for life. Unless he or she is a sociopath, a human cannot confront the utter brutalities of war without inner destruction.

One of the lowest forms of argument is to use a fallacious analogy, which is what you did. You could use a course in basic Logic, or Philosophy 101. Something to teach you to argue on the true merits of the case. You wanted everyone to agree that your Marine friend was right in pre-empting the situation by attacking one of the four men. Well, in a 4 to 1 situation, he probably was. But your story bears not the slightest resemblance to the matter of war or the people fighting it.

How can you bear to style yourself "continually amused"? It is so revealing, and not in a positive way.

@continually amused: Please note, however, that the relevant international law contained in the UN Charter (which is constitutionally a "supreme law" of the US) does not say that you have to wait for the other guy to throw the first punch. But the traditional concepts of anticipatory self-defense, arguably retained by the UN Charter for states acting unilaterally or multilaterally outside the UN framework, involve strikes aimed at forestalling an imminent attack, not simply generalized dangers.

That's where Bush's neocon "pre-emptive" and "full spectrum dominance" aggressions run afoul of the law. I can point you to some authoritative discussions on the subject if you wish.

The American military functions as an anti-poverty program. Poor people join because it's a way out. The best answer is not just to patch programs for veterans but to provide more support and opportunity in the whole society. Then joining up wouldn't be so attractive. Let the military shrink to a size necessary to defend the country, not to wage wars anywhere around the world.

There you go again Joey , trying to put into words the old propaganist lies. In this war just what are your brave young people defending us from?????? Saddam W.M.D.s?lies al-qeda? lies Iran? lies
You see joey when a country sends it troops whom by the way all signed up on thier own accords (not to mention the recuiters who hangs out at high schools) to wars that WE ALL KNOW are based on lies (not like your gloryfied war that we had to wait years before we found out that it all-so was based on lies)You expect the all ready sick system to change because of our braves people who are over there killing for what again? You see Joey you can never make things right until everything is made right or as our mothers used to say two wrongs will never make a right.
I feel for all the people who live here and can not get any health care not JUST the military for that old line of we owe the military for saving us from another lie??????just does not cut it anymore. Now if the military all threw down thier guns and said hell no we will not fight for lies THEN and ONLY THEN will I put my support for them and would fight anyone for thier rights to be cared for in a way they deserve. I think your blinded Joey keep looking at that gun you were given in Vietnam and remember the ones you killed.

It is sad to note that treating our veterans badly is as American as apple pie. The prime example is the Bonus March of 1932 (which prompted the American Legion to push hard for the passage of the G.I. Bill of Rights in 1944). When one compares the benefits veterans of other countries get as opposed to American ones, it is no surprise that the corporate media works real hard to keep that fact from the public.

http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/Update/Update2008-05-22.htm

As an Air Force veteran, you can honor me by not honoring me at all. Stop this glorification of war and violence. No more Memorial days, no more Veterans Days, no more stupid ass wars. Wars break hearts, takes lives, maims, wounds, kills, destroys, where the fuck is the honor in that?

As a Viet Vet I would like all Veterans to request from your area VAMCs' Information Officer the following:
Under the Freedom of Information Act I request the amounts of money paid above and beyond regular salary and overtime, to all past and present employees of the (your) VAMC from January 2007 through December 2007. This is to include, but not limited too, all Special Contribution Awards, Retention Incentives/Allowances, Retirement Incentives/Allowances, New Employment Incentives/Allowances, Relocation Incentives/Allowances, any and all Special Pay Incentives/Allowances, ETC.
Please limit this request to amounts $500.00 and above.
I would like this information in a format of names/titles of employee, award type, date given, and amount paid.
Simpler wording: Everything paid $500 above beyond regular salary & overtime for 2007 to all employees, past and present.If they give you any crap use Article 1 section 9 of our Constitution and tell them your going to want to know where every dime is going. I've been doing this for the past number of years just to see what the Iowa City VAMC administraitors (and they are) are giving themselves. Last year 2007 the total money above salary was over 7.4 MILLION dollars extra. The VA doesn't have to fight for any of this "bonus" money, it just keeps going up every year, and they like it that you all don't know about it. This also isn't to say that some "bonuses" are not warranted, just not 7.4 MILLION at just 1 VA. Honor our vets first by full funding and cut the red tape.

Also a VVET 65-67 then we were protecting the US from the godless communist hordes that were going to paddle their sampans over and run their flip flops all over our shopping malls and molest our women. Now we are protecting the US from the islamofascists (insert name du jour here) and stop them from molesting our women or replacing the bible with the Koran. Or something similar. No where does honor come into this equation. Fighting the war was the easy part, adjusting the to the aftermath takes the toll. We do owe the veterans much for lying to them and fooling them with false promises. Remember the flowers and candy routine? Easy to get an 18 year old to go to combat, try getting a fifty year old to perform that same stint. They might question the wisdom of the deployment, unless they are the lifers tied to the government because according to the military when you get out you will be fighting over garbage cans for food, and sleeping under a bridge, too true for some of our vets. Dishonest politicians are part of the problem, and unquestioning populace is another. Let them use the vets to address one of these problems it might wake them up.

To the Vets on this thread:

WELCOME HOME. There are no heroes, nor cowards. Just human beings trying to struggle through life and make it better (or not). Thank You for your hard-earned wisdom and I apologize that we didn't fight hard enough against the wars of occupation in Southeast Asia. Obviously, we're even doing worse this go-round.

If our veterans deserved honor, the country would give it to them. What they do deserve is sympathy, at least the enlisted personnel. Most joined without really knowing what they were getting into. And now they lack the courage of a Lt. Watada or Sgt. Mejia to do the right thing.
Our society is producing more and more anti-war vets and the more the better for this country. But, it's too late. It won't be long before our enlisted military jobs will be outsourced to companies like Blackwater. Then all our veterans will be from the officer's ranks. And there won't be any anti-war vets. War will be able to continue as a business, without complaints from disgruntled veterans.
Hoa binh

@Erroll: I, too, am a VVET, '68, and I agree with you. It is not honorable to participate in an illegal and immoral invasion; and, to die or return maimed and hurting, does not make one a hero. They are casualties of violence(none of these recent conflicts is a "war") perpetrated by the power brokers of this nation. Pat Tillman is not a hero; his story is tragic in that it is not being given the full light of truth. Had his writings been preserved, they may have cast a very different light on his true feelings on this invasion. I would love to see his mother, Mary, reveal some of those writings, if they do exist(see the Dave Zirin column from Edge of Sports, today).

I am committed to Oneness through Justice and Transformation
peace,
st john

@Erroll: Amen. Peace, brother.

Happy 29th Birthday Casey!.....wherever you are...

How We Can Really Honor Our Veterans

How about by not making so many of them? It's not that hard of a thing to do, just stop launching preemptive wars of aggression. Stop launching invasions of countries on the orders of financial tycoons who own oil, fruit and pepper companies.

Skippyagogo41 is certainly correct. As a Vietnam veteran, I certainly agree that it is a laudable goal to make sure that veterans receive their benefits. But that is treating the symptom and not the cause. As long as more soldiers are needlessly placed in harm's way, there will continue to be more of them filling up VA hospital beds around the country, suffering from the effects of being severely burned, blinded, brain damaged, paralyzed, missing their limbs, and feeling the effects, as I am, of PTSD.

But I strenuously disagree with Joseph Galloway that the soldiers who have returned from Iraq and Afghanistan have served "honorably." I did not serve honorably when I contributed to the deaths of many innocent Vietnamese people. Likewise, American soldiers have not served honorably by being part of a military that has illegally occupied Iraq and Afghanistan and have brutally suppressed the lives and civil rights of those people. Those soldiers who have acted honorably are people like Lt. Watada, who has said that he will not deploy to Iraq in order to take part in the occupation of that country and people like Camilo Mejia and Kevin Benderman [featured in the documentary Soldiers of Conscience] who went to jail because of their refusal to be a part of the U.S war machine. Those people, along with the members of the IVAW, are the true heroes of this country who have indeed served their country most honorably.