Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiWinter Soldier: Eye Witness Accounts of the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
Two years ago, public revulsion against the Bush Administration's unnecessary and disastrous attack and occupation of Iraq resulted in the Democratic Party taking control of the U.S. Congress. But Nancy Pelosi and the new political leadership backed down before President Bush and refused to withhold funding for the war, while rhetorically denouncing it and thus playing to anti-war voters. The liberal lobby group MoveOn spent tens of millions of dollars on anti-war advertisements and door-to-door canvassing events as part of its partisan campaign to blame the war on the Republicans, while letting Democrats off the hook for giving Bush all the money he wanted to continue the occupation into next year.
Today, as the 2008 election approaches, worry over Iraq has slipped down the public's list of concerns while more immediate economic issues and the spectacular collapse of the Wall Street investment banks take center stage. However, one anti-war organization has proven especially tenacious, independent and committed to immediately bringing home troops from Iraq and making good to the Iraqi people, while taking care of the soldiers who fought the war. That organization is the Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) composed of about a thousand soldiers who have recently served or are still serving in the U.S. military.
IVAW has provided the courageous and true leadership that partisan lobbies like MoveOn lack, opposing the war-funding politicians of both parties. When the Democrats nominated Barack Obama in Denver, IVAW was there in the streets demanding a meeting with Obama's people to press for an immediate end to the occupation. During the Republican Convention, as John McCain was talking from the stage in St. Paul he was confronted by a lone soldier, IVAW's Adam Kokesh, calling from the balcony and waving a sign of protest against the war. TV cameras briefly broadcast Kokesh's protest, but quickly pulled away from the young soldier in the black IVAW tee shirt calling out to McCain.
Last March the IVAW spent its own money and time to organize an historic event, the Winter Soldier hearings held outside Washington DC, where soldiers testified to the atrocities and war crimes they witnessed or personally committed while in Iraq and Afghanistan. The emotionally moving and carefully vetted truth telling lasted for days. Thanks to Aaron Glantz, Aimee Allison and others at Berkeley radio station KPFA, the IVAW testimony was broadcast live and is today available free online for anyone to hear.
To its disgrace, most of the mainstream corporate media ignored the hearings. The hard facts of the Iraq war, the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed, the millions driven from their homes, the thousands of American dead and tens of thousands wounded, are simply not deemed appropriate and newsworthy by American news media. Indeed, the U.S. media has pushed Iraq to the back pages and off the TV tube.
Not to be deterred, the IVAW continues to organize local and regional Winter Soldier hearings. I will be speaking at one hearing in Madison, Wisconsin, this Saturday, September 27, addressing the propaganda role of the U.S. media as a cheerleader for war. Available at the conference, hot off the printing presses, will be a new book that is the official account of IVAW's brutally honest and deeply moving testimonies. Winter Soldier, Iraq and Afghanistan was written by the Iraq Veterans Against the War and independent author and journalist Aaron Glantz.
This book reflects the IVAW belief often expressed by executive director Kelly Dougherty that "the only way this war is going to end is if the American people truly understand what we have done in their name." It's filled with gut wrenching personal stories and histories from the women and men who fought the war and still fight in the occupations. A collection of testimonies, the book is itself one single testimony to the powerful truths of soldiers facing up to a war millions would rather ignore and that the corporate media and political establishment does not want to honestly discuss. This is a very important book, one that every American should read and share. America owes an unpayable debt to its soldiers, especially its anti-war soldiers in the Iraq Veterans Against the War who do not back down to political gamesmanship from either political party.
82 Comments so far
Show AllI don't need to read the Constitution and its offensive to suggest it.
"clear that Congress was negligent in carrying out its duties to declare war and that the president clearly overstepped his boundaries by going around Congress as an excuse to, yes, illegally invade Afghanistan and then Iraq."
I felt that it was negligent myself, but that does not make it illegal and he did not go around Congress. I will assume you know the authority passed by Congress, if not, it fully authorized the President to take action. You are just mistaken.
Your suggestions and exaggerations of the numbers and terminology you use plainly show your bias here. Nothing wrong with an opinion, but its just an opinion. Facts are facts.
"just like the 3 to 5 million Vietnamese cannot be brought back to life after they were unjustly and, yes, illegally murdered"
Its amazing how this number keeps growing. But to keep it simple, to call the men that served in Viet Nam murderers exposes your lack of knowledge of war anywhere and Viet Nam in particular. Best to keep this on a civil basis I think. You need tio understand that this war is legal, I don't consider it justified. There is a world of difference.
I am a liberal, I am not a socialist and have little use for communist philosophy if that helps you out. I also have little use for dogmatic ideology. I prefer facts and the truth and I don't care if they come fron socialists, conservatives, communists....whoever.
Thomas More at Sept. 25 at 12:07 pm
"... to call the men that served in Vietnam murderers exposes your lack of knowledge of war anywhere and Viet Nam in particular." They were not murderers? Are you attempting to say that the Vietnamese shot themselves or that they immolated each other? This simply proves the hypocrisy of your claim that you are a liberal since it becomes apparent that what you really are is a flag waving, chest beating super patriot. You apparently need to be reminded that the tired old excuse that one was only obeying orders did not work out too well for German officials and German soldiers after World War II as they ended up being hanged for their offenses.
Of course the American soldiers were guilty of murder. Being in the military does not mean that one leaves one's brains behind in the civilian world. Sections 809.ART.90, 891.ART.91, 892.ART.92, of the UCMJ [Uniform Code of Military Justice] all state, as Dr. Lawrence Mosqueda of The Evergreen State College points out, that "military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ." You claim that you "prefer facts." Those statutes from the UCMJ are facts.
What is happening in Afghanistan and Iraq is repeating the carnage that occurred in Vietnam where soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan have shot and killed innocent civilians at checkpoints, broken into people's homes and dropped 500 and 2000lb. bombs on their homes and villages, resulting in the slaughter of many innocent children and civilians. So it is clear [or at least it should be] that your defense of the actions of the U.S. military against countries which never threatened anyone in these United States is unjustified, unwarranted, immoral as well as illegal. The genuine heroes of this country are those in the military today who are following in the footsteps of those who participated in the GI resistance during the Vietnam War and who have stood up and proclaimed that they will no longer be a part of an organization that takes part in the brutal occupation and rape of the Afghan and Iraqi people.
There's a reason that the quote "military justice is to justice as military music is to music", which some attribute to the incomparable Groucho Marx, has become a classic.
The atrocities at Haditha and elsewhere, occurring during military operations which are illegal and illicit in the first place, follow the usual recipe:
• Crimes and atrocities committed in "the fog of war", which is not necessarily "the heat of battle", may or may not be treated as such by unit leaders or field commanders-- who, after all, may have ordered, permitted, or participated in the crimes and atrocities, if only by failing to curtail them;
• Official reports-- which, again, may originate with complicit parties-- are invariably fudged by superiors; the atrocities and crimes are reduced to Merry Mixups, mistakes, unfortunate split-second judgement calls, and are effectively buried as routine;
• Local victims and witnessess are either paid off or intimidated, and in any case ignored or disbelieved by military officials and embedded media;
• Some time later, long after forensic evidence is obliterated at the unsecured "crime scene", a third party-- e.g., an NGO, an independent non-Amerikan journalist or news agency-- reports the heinous actions, and the report finally requires an official response;
• The military response invariably involves another round of mendacity and obfuscation, the bureaucratic public-relations version of "nothing to see here-- move along";
• If all the combat-boot dragging and stomping to keep the debacle under the tarp doesn't succeed, the military command finally bites the bullet, admits cautiously that "mistakes were made", and green-lights the military-justice apparatus to "investigate" and adjudicate the matter;
• The prosecutors have next to nothing to work with-- the above-cited process has conveniently disappeared the evidence and testimony prosecutors need to build a solid case. Funny how it works out that way;
• Eventually the criminals, who always claim that THEY'RE the "real victims" and exhibit ferocious self-righteousness at being "scapegoated", cheered on by their attorneys, family & friends, and a patriotic mob of 110% True Believer supporters, get their day in court;
• The judges and advocates, who are after all deeply invested in the military themselves and have every reason to avoid besmirching the Honor of the Service just because of a little collateral damage, are happy to give the defendants every consideration, especially because the prosecution's got nothin' anyway. Juries, even more so; the bias toward troops vis-à-vis some unknown and unseen foreigners is the same bias most juries show when cops are on trial;
• Result: acquittal, "exoneration", or at worst minimal punishment in the rare cases where the military can't help BUT convict. It works out differently once in a while-- mostly in the movies.
Thus, honor is saved!
Interesting opinion of military justice. I'd say its partially true. Haditha the guy's in the field say was BS and they were exonerated.
"Crimes and atrocities committed in "the fog of war", which is not necessarily "the heat of battle", may or may not be treated as such by unit leaders or field commanders-- who, after all, may have ordered, permitted, or participated in the crimes and atrocities, if only by failing to curtail them;"
Fair comment but happens very seldom.
"Official reports-- which, again, may originate with complicit parties-- are invariably fudged by superiors; the atrocities and crimes are reduced to Merry Mixups, mistakes, unfortunate split-second judgement calls, and are effectively buried as routine;"
Certainly happens, but far from routine.
At least this was my experience and I never knew of a cover up of murder or an "atrocity"
It certainly happens but its rare to say the least. In my opinion anyway.
The War In Iraq is illegal. End of story. There is no spinning 1441 into a UN authorization for war, try as people who want to continue to perpetuate this myth about "US the white hats".
This has nothing to do with "White Hats"
The simple fact is that its not an "illegal" war. Anyone can say it is but Congress gave the President the power to do it so its not illegal under our law. If you want to spin 1441 the other way, be my guest.
I do not support this war in any fashion, but I find its best not to spin (if I can help it) facts to support my position.
If we all view 1441 differently...so be it, but it looks to me as if it gives that authority. Its really a moot point and doesn't make much difference now.
Thomas More
You claim "its best not to spin" while stating that "Congress gave the President th power to do it [declare war] so its not illegal under our law." It would seem evident that you are, especially for someone who gives the appearance of being liberal, spinning quite furiously. You may wish to consult a document called the Constitution of the United States and go to Article I Section 8 of that document. Unless that part of the Constitution has been rescinded [which, as far as I can determine, it has not] then it would be clear that Congress was negligent in carrying out its duties to declare war and that the president clearly overstepped his boundaries by going around Congress as an excuse to, yes, illegally invade Afghanistan and then Iraq. You may attempt to irrationally justify this any way you want but it will not bring back the dead and mangled bodies of Iraqis and Afghans who have been slaughtered by American bombs and bullets just like the 3 to 5 million Vietnamese cannot be brought back to life after they were unjustly and, yes, illegally murdered when Johnson used the Tonkin Gulf Resolution to wage war against the Vietnamese.
Thomas More is a Liberal...I believe he is what is called a "Classical Liberal"
I hate labels on people but I think this one applies...and I have to say I respect his position on most things he posts on...even if I don't agree...its always well thought out and full of valid points...
Not just blind ideology...
(which I am accused of quite often and it might be true on occasion...sometimes)
Why thanks sir! I think Classical Liberal is a fair comment. It may be that folks try and call Progressives liberals. I agree with Starr there, They are not liberals. They are Leftists and a sprinkling of radicals that have renamed themselves.
What? You don't agree with everything I say? I'm shattered. I thought I'd brought you to the light on this war!
you're quite welcome, Sir
before I found this site I pretty much considered Liberal/Progressive/Radical different names for the same ideology...I have become enlightened (as they say) to the fact they aren't...
(I'm not quite a Disciple yet...but don't give up)
Liberal/Progressive/Radical different names for the same ideology..
Absolutely not! They are all very much different. Liberals don't usually buy into the "America is the cause of all wrong" stuff. The different types are fairly easy to tell apart, at least I think they are.
Radicals don't even acknowledge that they could be wrong or that any body Right of Atilla could be human.
The thing that puzzles me most is the almost desperate desire to label soldiers murderers. I know that the folk that say that have never been within a continent of Combat. And any Combat veteran as you know is far more anti-war than those that say that type of stuff, it just baffles me.
No one but a blithering idiot could fail to acknowledge the need for an excellent military force, so when people go anti-military rather than anti-war it confuses the heck out of me.
GwNorth
Cogently stated.
Snow wolf
And if you are so pro war, why the fuck aren't you enlisting? At this point the military is so stretched that even if you are a 100 years old they'll take you.
snow wolf,
No country invades other countries for a terrorist attack committed on its soil, it's against international law. Afghanistan didn't do it, neither did Irak. It's all a theatre for the military industry complex to keep enriching themselves with our taxpayer monies.
I don't understand why you can't see it and what is your purpose in coming to this forum and speak so much non sense. Sorry but your posts have no substance. And you wonder when the wars of crime have been commited? Abu Grahib, Guantanamo Bay, just for a few instances, but if you want more details, watch Winter Soldier or go to a IVAW meeting.
I went to the link above and listened to the testimony. I found it was missing any real detail as SnowWolf suggested.
Without names, dates and units involved its just stories. Why aren't these guy's bringing formal charges about these things if they are true? Or are they? Does anyone know if any formal complaints are in process based on these statements?
By the way Snow Wolf, your man Mccain desperately wants to POSTPONE the presidential debate that is due on Friday? And gee, it's just about FOREIGN POLICY, not the ECONOMY ! I thought Republicans were so FUCKING GREAT in foreign policy? What's the FUCKING matter with Mccain ? Afraid that the voters are finally going to see the connection between the economic failures and the foreign policy failures of the GOP, the likes of which they've never seen before in 28 years ?!?!?
P.S.:
And let's allow RALPH NADER TO TAKE MCCAIN'S PLACE and DEBATE BOTH PARTIES in ALL THREE DEBATES !
And Gonzalez will blow down that motherfucking pitbull Palin of yours in the VP debate !
and that is why he will win in November....
thats called Leadership...Obama just proved he isn't ready
You may be a bit premature there old Wolf. Its not looking good for McCain.
I'll admit a bad economy favors Democrats but outside of a couple "Outlier" Polls I don't see anything over a 3-4 point average lead for Obama..
I DO think McCain did a smart move suspending and going to D.C. because he can get Bipartisan Support (The Republicans are skeptical of Bailouts anyway) ...
only one Poll really matters though..Nov 4th
Skipping a debate is not called winning and it's not called leadership. Your man Mccain is looking more like Osama bin Laden. I see you're so desperate. Even Obama finally had the courage to keep the schedule. Even Ronnie Raygun wasn't a fucking coward !
If Mccain is not prepared to take the EXAM on Friday as scheduled, TOUGH LUCK ! He should have handled this a long time ago. So much for 26 years of experience ! LOL !
McCain will be debating Friday because Obama won't let him get away from it. My bet!
Exactly. Besides, it's all about foreign policy and if Mccain is "ahead in the polls" on the foreign policy front, he has no business begging for a postponing of the debate. Wall $treet can hold itself anyway. And I thought that all these senators had to do was JUST SAY NO to bailing out Wall $treet. If it's a free market, Wall $treet is free to let itself collapse and allow Main Street some breathing room for a change.
well...we'll see Nov 4th
No sense arguing about it now...
Siouxrose
There is nothing duplicitous about my statements. Supporting the soldiers but not the war has nothing to do with the Geneva Convention.
Soldiers do follow orders, but not illegal orders. Our soldiers are not members of the Nazi army as you imply nor are they under the same threat those German soldiers were.
Soldiers sign up for all sorts of reasons, some that Frederick suggested, many for other reasons. For whatever the reason, I believe its better than a draft which we would have without the volunteers. Would you prefer a draft? I certainly wouldn't.
A uniform certainly never absolves a person of murder. But killing in combat is not murder (though it can happen)and suggesting otherwise is just wilful negligence in my opinion.
As to a just war? Who knows. Some you must fight like the Revolutionary war, the Civil war, WW2....I've never been sure we needed to enter WW1. Others our soldiers were engaged by civilian leaders in wars we should never have been in like Viet Nam and Iraq. Are you going to blame the soldier for the leaders mistake? Are you going to wish him killed by the enemy or support the enemy as some traitors did during my war? Call him a murderer because he failed to allow the enemy soldier to kill him instead? Call him a coward because he won't desert or betray his country. Spit on him when he comes home? Call him a baby killer as some cowards did in my war?
killing in war is muder. it is sanctioned by the state
Bullshit. My apologies to the ladies present. But there is no other answer to that statement.
So tell me...
you come home one day...and find somebody in your house trying to stab your wife...you have a gun...
What do you do?...I am just curious
No more martinis, Wolfie, not until you finish posting!
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
*L*...Ok...I am putting the pitcher down now
That is a totally separate issue. Not all gun owners are for illegal wars such as Iraq.
I just wondered if he was an absolutist about killing in all situations...
Sorry if I didn't express that as well as I could have
"Soldiers do follow orders, but not illegal orders."
Many international legal scholars see the Iraq invasion as a violation of international law - as an illegal war.
If this is correct then all orders in support of the invasion/war are illegal.
Now, under International Law and the Geneva convention, the torture of prisoners is illegal. We know that our soldiers have tortured prisoners.
So don't say soldiers do not follow illegal orders. The few who have the courage to refuse are always punished and often imprisoned.
UN Resolution 1441 does end the asrgument about illegal war I hope. Those legal scholars would be wrong of course.
"Now, under International Law and the Geneva convention, the torture of prisoners is illegal. We know that our soldiers have tortured prisoners."
Under International Law and the Geneva convention, the torture of prisoners is illegal? Absolutely, without any doubt.
"We know that our soldiers have tortured prisoners."
We know that a few have, very few. Most of what you are referring to was conducted by contractors and civilian agencies. But those that did these things will eventually be dug out.
Don't mistake me for one moment, there are bad folks wearing our uniform. They have followed some illegal orders. But you are talking about less than a hundred of our actual military. Most have the courage to refuse illegal orders. I have certainly seen that. I hear its no different with these kids.
The best comparison I can think of is the convention wehere a few protestors broke windows, raised hell, etc...does that mean that all the protestors were like them? Was Amy a criminal too because she was there?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3661134.stm
Thursday, 16 September, 2004, 09:21 GMT 10:21 UK
"Iraq war illegal, says Annan
The United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan has told the BBC the US-led invasion of Iraq was an illegal act that contravened the UN charter.
He said the decision to take action in Iraq should have been made by the Security Council, not unilaterally."
To see why 1441 - WHICH IRAQ COMPLIED WITH - did not authorize the ILLEGAL invasion of Iraq see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Security_Council_Resolution_1441
Kofi Annan?
I see what you are saying.
Frankly I wouldn't believe him any more than Bush.
Let me say in my opinion it is a legal conflict that wasn't justified. We'll just agree to hold different opinions on the legal part as I'm sure we agree on the "not justuified" part.
Many international legal scholars see the Iraq invasion as a violation of international law - as an illegal war.
Then many International Legal "Scholars" need to read UN Resolution 1441 or possibly attend remedial legal training...or both
You may need remedial training but don't blame the scholars who don't agree with you on endless wars based on lies. By the way, why aren't you posting in the economic topics? And if Mccain is soooo great on foreign policy as them whoopdeedoo polls show, he wouldn't be a fucking coward to postpone a presidential debate especially if it's the first. Jimmy Carter did that in 1980 and LOST. Are you ready to watch Mccain LOSE for being a fucking coward ?
Oh?
you WANT me to post on the economic Topics?
Well Ok
Franklin Raines (former head of the Budget Office for Bill Clinton, Economic Advisor to Obama and) Former Head of Fannie Mae made 90 million dollars in executive bonuses in six years by shifty accounting and hiding the risk fannie was taking by buying loans made by mortgage companies (under pressure from the Clinton administration) to poor people with histories of defaulting
McCain tried to head off off this crisis in 2005 with legislation but was blocked by (wait for it) DEMOCRATS (its in the Congressional record...look it up)
Why would Democrats do that you ask?...hmmmm
number one recipient of campaign money from the board of Directors of Fannie Mae:
#1 Chris Dodd (D) Conn
#2 Barack H. Obama (D) Ill
We can talkabout the economy...but you're going to embaress yourself
and while you're at it why don't you peruse this article from the NYT (2003) and see what Barney Frank's role as head of the banking committee contributed to this crisis
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&scp=1&sq=%22barney+f...
''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."
Like I always said, I'm a Ralph Nader voter and that news is old news but thanks anyway. Besides, your son in Iraq will have a better life out of Iraq with a Nader presidency to rescue America from the economic collapse and the bankrupt "conservative" ideology. Call Nader anything you want but in the end, socialism for Main Street is what will rescue capitalism from its failings and FDR knew that damn well !
Frederick Johnson
Well said.
Sioux Rose
SNO WOLF: And you probably still think Saddam was behind 911 right? And I suspect you think GOD is on OUR side? It would never dawn on one with your us versus them perceptions that only those who see unity and work to resolve differences win the favor of Holy Spirit!
THOMAS MORE: Again, your duplicity shows up. To say you support the soldiers but not the war would not pass snuff with the Geneva Conventions, or don't you remember the chilling line, "I was only following orders..." and how far it went. Granted, it's not easy to turn against military authority; better still to not get into that position in the first place. And as Frederick JOHNSON pointed out (3:02 posting), there certainly are tragic reasons why people sign up. Still, the uniform absolves no one of murder, particularly when it is NOT and never has been a JUST war.
SNO WOLF: And you probably still think Saddam was behind 911 right?
Uh No..but thanks for stereotyping
Lets go over this one more time for the learning disabled among us...
Russia was very close to getting UN sanctions on Iraq lifted (because Russia isn't a very nice place), Once that was done Saddam was going back in the WMD business and there was an extremely high liklihood that he would have passed it off to people willing to die to deliver it here or some other western city...Anthrax, Smallpox, maybe even Sarin or some other really nasty neurotoxin agent that nobody is prepared for in a Civil Defense capacity (because you and the ACLU think that is all about trampling on your Civil rights)...so Saddam had to go
By the way if you're following the news Somali Pirates hijacked an Iranian Ship bound for Eritrea this week and opened sealed containers onboard. They are now deathly ill with who-knows-what...our Navy is gong to board it find out the cargo...if I had my way we would seize Ahmidinajad at the U.N. and make him board with them (sans Hazmat suit)
You are missing a career opportunity, in the writing of science fiction. Not one single shred of any preparation to produce chemical or biological weapons was found in Iraq, yet you persist in a line of reasoning so obviously labored and manufactured to fit that square peg into its ill fitting hole as to make me fear for your mental health.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Snow,
What's the reference source on Somali pirates and the Iranian ship? Now, is it at all possible that "Somali pirates" could have been Navy Seal covert ops, dressed as "Somali pirates"? (i.e. Seymour Hersh's report on Cheney's plan for dressing up Navy Seal ops, placing them on boats painted up to look like Iranian PT boats and attacking U.S. ships in the Gulf in order to start an incident blaming Iran) Is this a Pentagon story? I know it must be so much easier to swallow a Pentagon story than the accounts of the all-too-suspect accounts of anti-war Iraq veterans.
Yo Snow Wolf. If FOREIGN POLICY is Mccain's forte, he shouldn't be postponing the debate. Yeah, he had other days to go to Washington and not campaign but Friday? Besides, why not give more time before voting on a Wall $treet bailout scam that will only cost the taxpayers more? It looks like Mccain is scared to death that the public is even more aware of the connections between the FAILED economic policies of the last 8 years and the failed foreign policies as well from "free" trade to endless wars ! Get off this site and tell your buddy Mccain to be a man and let the debate proceed on Friday ! Obama's not backing off and for once he's got some courage ! Why can't Mccain?
Why don't you move to Iraq where you belong?
Hell...make it the 51st State for all I care
(would that be 58th for Obama?)
Uh, yeah whatever. Obama or Mccain, it doesn't make a difference. Geez !
There's already more than enough proof that Iraq and Afghanistan were COMPLETE FAILURES. Sure, we displaced the Taliban and Al Quaida TEMPORARILY in Afghanistan but as soon as we turned our eyes to Iraq for the oily robber barrons, we LOST in Afghanistan. And let's face it. If we had won in Iraq, we would have been out already. The rightwing detractors who will forever keep trying to make it look like we're "winning" or "making progress" in Iraq cannot change the fact that we're LOST and still LOSING in Iraq. The war was supposed to "pay for itself" but it did not and it never will. The MISleadership in Iraq is nothing more than a US puppet for Big Oil. The longer we stay in Iraq, the more we LOSE LOSE LOSE just like we did in Vietnam. How much more money are we gonna keep borrowing from China to keep this reckless war on life support?
Pro-longing the war/occupation in Iraq is like a student who never completes his or her assignments and keeps asking for more time or isn't prepared to take the exam on exam day and still keeps asking for more time.
Enough is enough, PERIOD.
Failure? I believe both engagements to have been raving successes, for the military industrial complex they were designed to help.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
As a Vietnam vet, I completely agree with and support the IVAW. I wish I had had the courage to say that about the Vietnam Veterans Against the War. I know now that antiwar vets are not anti-American. In fact they love their country so much that they continue to fight for it after they are discharged. The antiwar vet hasn’t lost his patriotism, but his country has. So, they are proudly antiwar. They are the true patriots of this country. Not the cowardly politician or the greedy businessman or the hypocritical religious leader. The antiwar vet is a full circle vet. He’s gone from following orders to questioning orders. A vet who has traveled to the frontlines of our domestic political battles. And what he has seen and experienced is shocking. Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama and all the way up to Iraq. On the frontlines he saw our foreign policy being played out. Not on TV, or spun through the newspapers. He saw first-hand the death and destruction resulting from political decisions made by his government. What he didn’t see was what he was expecting. A clean war in which we are the good guys, and we never lose our humanity in battle. And in the end we win. Antiwar vets join with a good heart and honorable intentions. The same thing that motivates them today.
All wars are wrong. Not just the current one.
Hoa binh
Hear Hear. As a Vietnam veteran also, I wished that I had had the courage and knowledge to have said no to the illegal and immoral orders that I was given those many years ago. Whenever an American, whether liberal or progressive, sees an soldier, the automatic knee jerk response is to thank them for their service, I could never understand why I was being thanked for contributing to the needless deaths of innocent Vietnamese people. The real heroes of this country, as you correctly note, are not those soldiers who blindly obey orders but those soldiers who come to the realization that they have a brain and understand that the UCMJ tells them that they not only have a right but a duty and an obligation not to obey unlawful orders. As former Master Sergeant and Green Beret [that is not a typo] Donald Duncan observed in the powerful documentary Sir! No Sir!:
"The problem I had was realizing that what I was doing was not good. I was doing it right but I wasn't doing right." Duncan pointed out in the film that while U.S. Special Forces would accompany the ARVN while they tortured their prisoners, what was worse was the cynicism expressed by the Americans as they believed that, just like what is happening in Iraq and Afghanistan, it as all done "for the good of the cause."
It is also noteworthy to recall the words of David Cline, who was seriously wounded in Vietnam, and said in the film:
"You find out that it's all lies, they are just lying to the American people. And your silence just means that you are a part of keeping that lie going. I couldn't stop; I couldn't be silent. I felt I had a responsibility to my friends, and to the country, in general. And to advocate for the Vietnamese [who were fighting for their country]."
The hope is that the soldiers finally come to the realization that their silence is keeping that lie going and that they owe it to themselves to advocate for the Iraqi and Afghan people. As David Zeiger said in an interview with Mother Jones magazine, the soldiers " are just as capable as anyone of knowing right from wrong."
This comment was in reply to since 1492 at 2:41 pm.
Of course anti-war vets are not unpatriotic. Anyone that says that as a generality is to stupid to live. If you think the war is wrong, no matter the war, its your duty to speak out about it when you get home.
Our country hasn't lost its honor, its leaders have.
You show me someone that wants to go to war or says wars are good and I'll show you a sophomoric moron on a level with folks that say you should never go to war. Sometimes you have to. This however wasn't one of them.
Eisenhower made a mistake when he engaged us in Viet Nam, he never counted on the stupidity of Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon.
Historical tidbit. Eisenhower was somewhat forced by Truman's earlier refusal to negotiate between the French and the Vietnamese, after being requested to do so my Ho Chi Minh. Truman's military support of the French set Eisenhower up to engage in military action after the defeat of France.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Excellent point.
Well I certainly agree with you on the All Wars are wrong sentiment...SOME Wars are necessary....I'll Leave History to judge Iraq, Afghanistan is one of those necessary Wars
(I am also a Vet...but I subscribe to the "Just War" Philosophy)
Too bad history is already judging Iraq and Vietnam to be UNNECCESARY wars and as for Afghanistan, the US failed to do its job is what history's already telling like it or not.
Like Iraq or hate it...that one is over...they are almost ready to self Govern now
Afghanistan is still active only because the Taliban and Al Quaida can hide in Pakistans Tribal Areas (and we're showing them they are no longer secure there either)...We may YET Lose in Afghanistan but we aren't currently...
in my "Professional" opinion Africa will be the next Theatre...(Somalia, Eritrea)
"Like Iraq or hate it...that one is over...they are almost ready to self Govern now "
That's not what your neocon buddies are saying when they still insist on keeping the troops there. A country that can self-govern doesn't need any foreign intervention or policing, PERIOD.
"Afghanistan is still active only because the Taliban and Al Quaida can hide in Pakistans Tribal Areas (and we're showing them they are no longer secure there either)...We may YET Lose in Afghanistan but we aren't currently..."
Well, your neocon buddies had a golden opportunity to CRUSH the Taliban and Al Quaida in Afghanistan before they fled to Pakistan but they FUCKING BLEW IT and then diverted attention to Iraq while giving backdoor money to the Muslim militants in Pakistan further enabling them to crush the working class in that country who were sick and tired of both the extremists and the foreign interventionists who enabled those extremists in the first place. The Taliban and Al Quaida already have control of most of Afghanistan since the commoners have been rendered hopeless by military interventionism by both extremes. Karzai will be stepping down next year. Let's see what Afghanistan is like on 9/11/2009. Obama and Mccain have no business bombing that country or Pakistan. The best either one of them can do is to STOP GIVING FINANCIAL AND MILITARY AID WITH OUR TAXPAYER MONEY !! Besides, the country's around 10 trillion in debt and rising !
"met returned vets who admitted to crimes against humanity"
My only question(s) is...
Names, Places and Dates please?...(these guys didn't do that)
why were they allowed to testify without being under oath?
Make a believer of me...tell me WHO you saw do these things...or WHO told YOU to do these things...Your Sergeant?...Your Platoon Leader?...Your CO?..names, places and dates is all it would take to give you credibility in my eyes...but those elusive little details are very lacking in all these stories
Hit the link and see.
http://warcomeshome.org/wintersoldier2008audioarchive
"A squad in his unit was responsible for the massacre of 26 civilians in Haditha"
Um...those Guys were all Courts Martialed and found Innocent...there was no Massacre (Villagers said the victems were "executed" and NCIS Forensic Evidence and footage from a UAV (Drone) in the area supported the Marines Claims of a Firefight)
just a bit of bias here or what? ...
Thomas...definite anti-Military site
"definite anti-Military site"
Just because it doesn't support the oily war in Iraq and the failed one in Afghanistan, eh? Why don't you move to Iraq where you belong? Your party created that "nice" environment for you.
I am just ponting out the inequities in their "Testimony"...it is worthless without Names, Places and Dates..
if I witnessed something Illegal you couldn't shut me up (when I got back here) and I would definitely implicate every Son of a Bitch that had dirty hands...
They just referred to a "Massacre" at Haditha...Never happened...and don't yell Marine Corp Coverup because the Corp WANTED them convicted...but the Evidence from the SCENE supported their story completely and the "Villagers" not at all
So don't try to tell me these Guys are credible...sorry
"So don't try to tell me these Guys are credible...sorry"
Tough luck buddy but the USA is LOSING in Iraq and Afghanistan and I'm sorry that you can't stand to listen to these honest veterans speaking out against a war that we failed ourselves on by diverting to a war based on LIES.
Frederick
He is questioning the veracity of their stories. It has nothing to do with the war itself. SnowWolf supports it I believe and I don't, but we both need a bit more detail to believe a guy just because he was in country.
I don't know about these floks, but generalities are usually indicative of a bit of hyperbole. As I pointed out above, one of the founders proved less than reliable in his testimony.
It seems reasonable to me that if these guys saw what they say they saw, they would have names and dates. Don't you think thats true?
Thomas,
I will agree that eye witness alone isn't a great way to prove that something happened. In this country alone, there are a lot of death penalty cases based solely on eye-witness testifying and on that note, yes I do believe that they need more proof. As to the article, I wouldn't have taken this story seriously but in this case, since Iraq has turned out to be a total mess, the author's article only seems to compound what has been confirmed. As far as IVAW is concerned, they need to start going local and building up from there. That's how the NRA became very successful and powerful. Even today, the NRA fights tooth and nail on local, state, and federal levels. IVAW could try building a better and united infrastructure for a change. Maybe that will make their reports harder to question. I'm sorry I'm in such a disgusted mood what with the way this country is a total failure and the almost-certain-to-happen Wall $treet bailout which will most likely resemble the CAFTA vote in 2005. Sigh ...
Frederick
"there are a lot of death penalty cases based solely on eye-witness testifying"
Boy you got that right. Good example! And others. A guy just got out after 26 years for rape, convicted by an eye witness.
Iraq is hopefully better than it could have been, but we should never have gone there. And it is a mess, but its up to us top clean it up or help them to (if they want us to)...they may say soon...go home.
Its bad, but we will come through this too. It isn't as bad as they say anyway. People keep saying how bad our ciountry and economy is, but its not. As soon as we get these Baboons out of office, we'll get to work...I hope.
"Its bad, but we will come through this too. It isn't as bad as they say anyway. People keep saying how bad our ciountry and economy is, but its not. As soon as we get these Baboons out of office, we'll get to work...I hope."
I don't know but Mccain or Obama, it already looks very bleak out there. I mean, yes, I'm sure I'll pull through hell just like the last 8 years but as always it just gets rougher as everything goes up in costs, landlords increase their fees outrageously, and there's just more of the worst.
I would love to see Ralph Nader make it to the White House even if he has to face a very hostile Congress who will suddenly show their "spine" by doing everything they can to stop him from rescuing Main Street. Maybe Nader can sign executive orders and bypass Congress. At least that's what my wife recommends Nader to do. I told her that he would look like Hugo Chavez and face assassination attempts. She told me in return "So what? Nader should arm himself with guns (preferably machine guns) and stronger bulletproof vests. I recommend he even transform himself into Robocop !" Now what would this country be like with RoboCop Nader in charge kicking Congress to the curbs?
Trtuthfully I think Congress and who controls it is the key for the next 4 years. The President will be quite constrained by the "bailout" in their programs. National healthcasre is history at this point.
I'm with you, its going to get worse and there is going to be quite a shock for younger folks that never had to tighten their belt before. We may be older but we have been there before.
Many people believe the fantasies about America being just another economy but we'll soon find out that "global" health still depends on us. The internationalists are wrong as usual.
You'll be fine I'm sure. And help is going to have to be arranged for some of your problems as well. It was last time. So, lets see what happens next month.
I went to the link. As far as I can tell these are informal interviews. They are not under oath apparently and there aren't any details so far of the exact units and times. Mostly I saw.....type testimony. Are there any other links?
I need to listen to more to be sure and am going back later this evening. But the website seems to be about more than this, it seems to be anti-military.
I would suggest to you that you should take some of this with a grain of salt, remember one of the founding members said he was flying combat missions...turned out he was flying mail out to the carriers. Sometimes people embellish to make their point. Could be here, I don't know yet.
"They are not under oath apparently and there aren't any details so far of the exact units and times."
They aren't under oath because these aren't government hearings.
Well of course. Mama said I'd have off days! But I'd still say if its not given under oath its pretty much soldiers gossip. The truth will come out though just as it did for Hidatha and Abu Greb.
Who cares? There's already plenty of cold hard evidence out there to prove that Iraq and Afghanistan were complete failures. What more do you need?
Update: I see you clarified your comments. My apologies.
Regardless of your political persuasion, the Winter Soldier's testimonies are something everyone should hear. I'm glad to see they are available on-line.
Unless you're a die-hard war supporter it isn't likely to change your views - as a matter of fact it will probably just reinforce them. It will give you a view of the monumental moral and personal degradation the war has brought about.
To clarify my comments...I do not support this war, not before, not now...but I unwaveringly support the kids that are there and their service. They are doing their jobs.
"They are doing their jobs."
Only because everything domestically has been GUTTED and these men and women were forced into thinking they had no choice. How many of these troops would be stuck in Iraq if NAFTA, CAFTA, WTO, outsourcing, gutting education, etc ... hadn't been put forth? These kids may be doing their "job" but they ain't gettin' rewarded for it even on that. "Support the troops" is nothing but a BULLSHIT phrase !
I have personally met returned vets who admitted to crimes against humanity. The war is typical, except US soldiers often fulfill their video game fantasies in real life on the streets of Iraq killing innocent (ragheads) at will for no reason.
The bad karma alone will keep America's collapse imminent.
World opinion has never been lower either. When a new business is deciding which country to invest in or expand into, don't think for a minute that anti-American sentiments help us any. The world will gladly watch us self-destruct in our own greed and stupidity.
Let's just not elect Palin to start WWIII and bring on the end of the world she so dearly wants to happen.
"met returned vets who admitted to crimes against humanity"
What crimes did they tell you about?
I doubt that there has ever been a war in which atrocities were not committed. It is one of the best reasons for not prosecuting a war in the first place. The first atrocity was the Bush administration's slaughter of the truth in persuading a gullible and fearful Congress to allow him to engage in the destruction of a sovereign nation, Iraq.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Excellent point.