Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiThe War Condolences Obama Hasn’t Sent
U.S. Army Reserve Spc. Chancellor Keesling died in Iraq on June 19, 2009, from “a non-combat related incident,” according to the Pentagon. Keesling had killed himself. He was just one in what is turning out to be a record year for suicides in the U.S. military.
In August, President Barack Obama addressed the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention, saying, “[T]here is nothing more sobering than signing a letter of condolence to the family of [a] serviceman or -woman who has given their life for our country.” To their surprise, Jannett and Gregg Keesling, Chance’s parents, won’t be getting such a letter. Obama does not write condolence letters to loved ones of those who commit suicide in the theater of combat. [After making inquiries, the Keeslings discovered that this was not because of an oversight. Instead, it’s because of a longstanding U.S. policy to deny presidential condolence letters to the families of soldiers who take their own lives.]
Jannett told me: “Chancellor was recruited right out of high school, and this was something he was passionate about, joining the military. I wanted him to go to college, but he said that he wanted to be a soldier.” Gregg added: “We had doubts about him joining. ... When the war broke out in 2003, when many of us were trying to retreat, Chancy decided, ‘This is my duty.’ ... But once he did his first tour ... his marriage broke up during that deployment.”
Chance was very troubled during his first tour of duty in Iraq, although he performed admirably by all accounts. At one point he was put on a suicide watch and had his ammunition taken away for a week. After Iraq, Chance declined a $27,000 reenlistment bonus and transitioned to the U.S. Army Reserves, hoping to avoid another deployment. He sought and was receiving treatment at a Veterans Affairs facility. Gregg said, “We sat down as a family, and we said, ‘President Obama is going to be elected, and President Obama will end this war, and you won’t have to go.’ ” But then his son’s orders to deploy came again.
Current laws prevent transfer of mental health information from active-duty military to the reserves, so Chance’s commanders did not know of his previous struggles. Last June, troubled again, he sent his parents a dire e-mail, mentioning suicide. Jannett recalled: “I spoke to Chancellor the night before he died for about four minutes. And as always, he wore a really tough exterior. ... But what he did tell me that night is that he was going to have a very long, difficult day. His conversation was quite brief. Normally he would say that he loves me, and he would say goodbye. But this time he simply hung up.”
The next morning, Gregg said, Chance “locked himself in the latrine and took his own life, with his M-4 ... our grief is deep. The letter won’t stop [our pain]—we’ll still be hollow inside for the rest of our lives, but the acknowledgment from the president that our son gave his life in service to the causes of the United States is important to us.”
The Pentagon admits to a mounting suicide crisis in its ranks. Numbers of acknowledged suicides have steadily climbed, from fewer than 100 in 2005, by one report, to nearly 200 in 2008, with a like number among Iraq and Afghanistan veterans. Gregg Keesling said that when he and Jannett went to Dover Air Force Base to greet Chance’s coffin, a master sergeant encouraged him to speak out, saying: “I’m greeting a suicide body almost every day. There’s something going on.”
The Keeslings credit Maj. Gen. Mark Graham with helping them through their grief, and working to reduce the stigma of suicide within the military. One of Graham’s sons committed suicide in 2003, while studying as an Army ROTC cadet in college. His other son, also in the Army, deployed to Iraq months later and was killed by a bomb not long thereafter. But the GI Rights Hotline, which advises active-duty soldiers on options for leaving the military, says outside psychological professionals can help suicidal soldiers obtain a medical discharge: “The military wants to know whether the patient can perform their duties without causing trouble, embarrassment or expense. His or her welfare is distinctly less important.”
The United States is engaged in two intractable, massive military occupations, with no end in sight. Obama should certainly write letters of condolence to the Keeslings and to others whose loved ones have found that the only sure way to end the living hell of war, or to escape the horror of its aftermath, is to kill themselves. But an immediate withdrawal from the wars Obama inherited is the only way to stem the bleeding.
Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column.
70 Comments so far
Show Alland the count goes on
Although the mental illness that would cause someone to commit suicide is truly sad, I would be more sympathetic if this young man had been DRAFTED - which increases the possibility that he went against his will, the way so many boys did during Viet Nam.
Besides the fact that we have no business being there to begin with, I can't help but wonder:
What did he think he was going to be doing when he joined the army? What did he think his sense of "duty" entailed?
Why didn't anyone try to make sure he got help? His family?(you know the army wouldn't give a sh*t)
Among the other failures here is a massive failure of education, of the educational system.
What DID the young man think?
Why would his family have known any better?
Apparently he did not anticipate what he got. Likely he did not anticipate what he would do. Certainly he did not appreciate what he would feel.
Even when there was a draft, people could resist. Even without a draft, people get pressured to enlist - pressured by poverty and pressured more by ignorance.
..
In fall of 1972, all senior males of a local high school were scheduled a counseling appointment. They received directions to not discuss the meeting with fellow students on penalty of expulsion.
For the most part, they obeyed.
Each student entered the counseling office alone. The counselor was around thirty years old, with deep blue eyes, fine features, deep curves, and a fairly low-necked sweater.
She told each student that he had to register for the draft, that resisters would be jailed, that no one escaped.
I thought she looked baffled at receiving no resistance. She batted her eyes and shifted, but looked, as nearly as I could discern when I raised my eyes, utterly miserable.
American recruitment involves a poverty draft, including the poverty draft that facilitates hiring mercenary thugs from other countries. But neither compares to the ignorance draft, the mythmakers' draft, the damnfoolishness draft.
And those drafts or that draft, if it is one, remains well tended.
A curse on the lies,
and the hedging,
and the deadly-aimed silence.
The Owl
I find myself totally in agreement with the point that you have raised. As Lance Selfa made clear in his book The Democrats: A Critical History as well as Savage Mules by Dennis Perrin, the Democrats are just as warlike as their Republican colleagues. Norman Solomon's book and DVD War Made Easy made the same point. Unfortunately, perhaps because they have been so brainwashed into believing [or at least hoping] that Obama can do no wrong or perhaps because the occupations have taken a back seat to the health care debate, the American people, both liberal and conservative, have remained largely mute while another Democratic president seems to be doing his best in emulating LBJ by ripping to pieces more people in third world countries, which in this case would be the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan.
I live in a fairly liberal city. Pre-2009, there were many "troops out now" and "no war" and "no war for oil" signs in front lawns. they all disappeared. Why? We are still at war. Afraid to ask of Obama what was demanded of GW Bush?
I say it was murder, not suicide. It is very clear he had ptsd in some form. that's why he was in treatment. the military has been sending guys like him back into the fire as official policy for some time, because they don't have enough people in uniform.
the generals do not want to hear about ptsd, or any kind of mental problems suffered by the troops. they would like to keep all this, and the suicides too, quiet.
so they have been sending head cases back into combat. and this is the inevitable and predictable result. It's murder.
Abuelo
An acute and well said observation concerning the lunacy of war.
Jeevee
Remember the disclosure that Obama has played more golf in his first nine months than Dubya did in eight years in office? What does THAT say about the "man"?
"Now watch this drive!"
· Yr Obd't Servant
Yawn!
When the parents write to Obama and demand he sends his condolences to the people this dear boy, their dear son killed or helped kill I will take note of them. It is by now thoroughly demonstrated that, like all pirates, Americans by their actions have denied their own humanity. In fact those who take their own lives when forced to be pirates are the humans and this comment hopes sincerely that, at the death, Chancellor was not just a poor broken wretch but just such a hero.
This inversion to evil dear fellows is what America has achieved.
Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!
The culture of America has become a spreading cloud of dark, absurdist humour.
This is simply a disgrace. Chancellor Keesling is as much a casualty of war as the Marine that was killed by an IED. He was killed by this war just as surely as if a sniper shot him through the head.
That he should be treated differently, that his parents are denied a letter of sympathy and understanding from this President or any other is Horse shit. I apologize, but there is no other way to express my feelings.
This is a desk bound warrior decision. President Eisenhower would tell them to get stuffed. Kennedy would have said go to hell. They would have written. So would Bush 1.
This boy deserved far better from his leaders, but his leaders are not worth his spit.
And now, for something completely different:
"Holder to meet plane carrying bodies of DEA agents"
You can bet that he'll have a FISTFUL of condolence letters with him. And I wouldn't be surprised if they threw in an invite to the White House for a bereavement brewski!
· Yr Obd't Servant
Waiting for a letter from Obama???
Look, it's effing awful that your son went out this way --
beyond awful --- but if you need a letter from O-bee to make the pain go away, you're living in the same dreamland your
son was living in when he signed on --
yeah, it's worse than being woken up with a bucket of ice water -- that doesn't mean 'don't wake up'
I did not know Chance, but I can speculate.
Some people have empathy and some dont. Those that have it will suffer greatly when they are forced to do dirty deeds. Others dont care about what they have done, or are able to lie to themselves about why, and make perfect killing machines.
Maybe Chance was one of those who simply could not live with the pain, suffering and death that he was forced to meter out. If that is it, then Chance was one of the good ones.
Makes a grown man want to cry.
You don't have to wonder whether Obama cares or not, it is whether his actions are caring or not.
And clearly if he is escalating the war in Afghanistan, Pakistan, continuing the occupation of Iraq, talking about taking action against Iran, bailing out corporations; but won't even consider single payer health care, his actions speak louder than words.
Why worry about condolences? Obama's actions are clear. He has consistently sided with the corporate elite who this war is being fought for. Our soldiers are dying so that corporations can profit. Don't think it is any other way.
“Chancellor was recruited right out of high school, and this was something he was passionate about, joining the military. I wanted him to go to college, but he said that he wanted to be a soldier".
I feel for anyone who suffers as a result of war, including the men, women and children that are killed, maimed and whose houses and villages are destroyed by the "soldiers".
This young man had an opportunity to go to college, but he wanted to be a "soldier", whatever that meant to him.
Stop the insanity now. Stop enlisting to play "soldier" and you will save everyone a lot of heartache.
The only people that benefit from war are the government and war profiteers that invade, control and steal other country's resources.
A Peace Department, an end to war, public works programs, end to NAFTA, green jobs, free public college; these are all actions that Dennis Kucinich will take as President and good reasons to support him.
Good statement, sue1403.
Ms. Goodman why didn't you expose Obama BEFORE the elections? And why didn't you give more time on your show to McKinney and Nader?
Now it's too late to bitch. You knew he was a fraud 2 years ago you're not a dumb woman, you knew his record in the Senate, it was all there black on white.
Clearly, you're shooting from the hip on Goodman's record with Obama and clearly you have not followed DemocracyNow with any regularity; both McKinney & Nadar have been on numerous times (and will continue to be on) and her headlines and feature reports have consistently prodded and ripped Obama before the election and since.
Your post is wildly inaccurate.
No I'm not being inaccurate and during the campaign tuned to Democracy Now daily. Daily, let me repeat. Nader and McKinney were guests perhaps once were twice. Kucinich was a guest way more often. Goodman and her crew were unfortunately lured by Obama's massive drive to brainwash millions, not as blatantly as MSNBC or CNN of course, but he got coverage on a daily basis, and most of it positive. Disappointing.
Hmmmm. Apparently you don't tune into DemocracyNow very much Uncle Charlie?
Amy Goodman not only had both McKinney and Nader on several times but had them on immediately after the so called "debates" between Obama and McCain and allowed them to answer the exact same questions that the democrat and republican candidates answered, allowing we the people, who tuned in, to decide for ourselves that he was a fraud. What else was she supposed to do? And I'd hardly call that bitching, she is just reporting a story.
It seems that all of life is merely a game to most of the powerful. It also seems that rules of engagement, to the powerful, are for losers. In the United States, this means labelling yourself "democrat" or "republican" depending upon which guise best suits your personal technique in the game.
Winning and confidence are of the utmost importance -this is the message which is constantly trumpeted- and if you are capable of seeing (or dare to feel) more than one side of any situation, then you do not deserve respect, according to their beliefs.
The powerful have no shame because they believe that would make them suseptible to rest of the pack of predators.
They would rather destroy the nation than to appear vulnerable, unless they have a highly refined technique wherein they can pull it off. It is the same approach used in all areas - banking, health care, education, or financially crippling a foreign nation before starting a war of aggression to grab its resources.
Truly, the saddest aspect of this behavior is that it is used against the most vulnerable within their own society to try to force them to participate in their own slaughter.
People keep trying to make a connection between what Obama says and what he does.
They just don't get it.
Worth repeating!
Joe
In August, President Barack Obama addressed the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention, saying, “[T]here is nothing more sobering than signing a letter of condolence to the family of [a] serviceman or -woman who has given their life for our country.” To their surprise, Jannett and Gregg Keesling, Chance’s parents, won’t be getting such a letter. Obama does not write condolence letters to loved ones of those who commit suicide in the theater of combat.
Erroll October 28th, 2009 9:42 am
Chancellor Keesling's death is another symptom of this most unnecessary war. Unfortunately his parents are under the delusion that Obama cares about the way his son died.
Obama says, "I may be skinny but I'm tough."
No, you're just skinny. What you take for toughness is just plain garden variety cowardice mixed with a lot of vanity.
Your last line speaks the truth sir.
Your last two lines say it all. And so goes the words of the Imperial Obama.
does anti-war mean anti-war? Seems the left supports communist wars and communist invasions (over the years). And the anti-war movement cheers palestinian killers. Pathetic.
I tried to resist the obvious baiting from theowl, but I just couldn't...
From my perspective, I have never cheered a palestinian "killer." No life is worth more than any other, and no sister is worth less than any brother. A Palestinian life is equal to an Israeli life, and the sooner we can all accept that fact the sooner the bloodshed will end.
I will not speak for others, but in the peace and justice organization in which I participate, I have never heard anyone support the right of Palestinians to kill Israelis. We believe nonviolence resistance is the answer because violence is counter-productive in garnering world support.
HOWEVER, there is a big difference between "cheering" palestinians who feel attacking Israel is a valid means of self-defense and having empathy as to why they feel compelled to take up "arms." (a joke when considering the difference in firepower)
I'll ask you theowl, have you ever lived in such conditions that exist in Palestine? Have you ever had a wall built between you and your livelihood or you and your food? Have you seen your brothers, fathers, sisters, children, grandparents murdered by occupying and invading forces? Have you had your home bulldozed? Have you ever had to walk through a checkpoint to get to work? Have you ever had a foreign army block aid supplies which you desperately need?
If you have, do you think you take arms against the perpetrators of the crime and become a "killer." Or would you be so pure as to choose nonviolent resistance.
It is easy for me typing here at a computer to say they should refrain from further killings - but my life has been blessed to the point where I have not lived in those untenable conditions.
Your other point about communist invasions is too ridiculous to even address.
If you have watched other posts by "the owl" you will realize that he is hardly wise like we assume owl's in nature to be, but most likely "an old hoot" like we assume people who say things that are uninformed.
While not directly, The Owl brings up the valid point that there really is no peace movement; something that will take a much greater depth of human recognition, of Self and Other, then the current human population on Earth now exhibits (sorry, though her tone has made a shift the last couple years, expressing grief and anger at the loss of her son as Cindy Sheehan does is not a peace offering). Until more then .000000000001% of the human population can manifest peace ability it's pick and choose what war one wants to be anti to -- and of course this is so self-righteously exciting that it will be hard to give up...regardless of the pleasure peace offers.
In the Detroit area, the so called Peace and Justice organizations have as their most recurrent marching chant, "No Justice, No Peace" (ooooo...what a threat...and how absurd!). Is it the same with your organization?
As much as I like Amy Goodman, not everything she says is spot on. This is one of them.
What happened is tragic. Just because Obama hasn't responded doesn't mean Obama doesn't care about suicides in the military (or this family's plight). Obama's not the person who's indifferent to those who serve, are killed in action, or die of self-inflicted wounds. Goodman shows no logical evidence of that. She tries to piece one and one together but doesn't connect the dots. She says they're there but she doesn't do the work.
I think Goodman could choose a more tactful way of raising this man's fate and several others who die from suicide. It's a serious issue, we all know it. But Obama isn't someone that doesn't care about suicides in the military, nor does he not care about that person's family members as well.
I couldn't disagree more, Red Rum.
What's YOUR "logical evidence" that Obama DOES care? What's your source for this conclusion? Your imagination? The flickering of Obama's silvery forked tongue?
Despite the marketing of Obama's domestic life, a fusion of "The West Wing" and "The Cosby Show", and despite Obama's Warm 'n Wonderful superficial mannerisms and trademark BLINDING grin, the man doesn't exhibit a scintilla of genuine warmth or compassion.
It's been obvious for some time, but it didn't strike me until just recently that our highest Elected Misrepresentatives and their chosen cohort are typically CORPORATE LAWYERS in the pejorative sense of the term. Isn't the fact that they've remained in service to the banksters a "tell"?
As I commented recently, both Abraham Lincoln and LBJ were reported to be deeply emotionally burdened by the wars they prosecuted-- and it showed in their faces.
It may be due to the miracle of Botox-- the Gorgon Pelosi gets it wholesale, and may have cut Obama in on the action-- but I don't see even an incipient crease on Obama's brow. I don't think he's deeply emotionally burdened, because he lacks the requisite intellectual and emotional depth.
Putting it tactfully, that is.
· Yr Obd't Servant
"There's plenty of room on the Hill, once you learn to smile as you kill" - (Working Class Hero, Lennon)
And what a beautiful smile Barack displays...isn't it? Isn't it so wonderful to have him in office with such a magnificent smile? I'm sure glad he's our president...I just love his smile.
"But Obama isn't someone that doesn't care about suicides in the military, nor does he not care about that person's family members as well."
Just as you have stated that Goodman "shows no logical evidence" and "tries to piece one and one together" etc., perhaps you could enlighten us further as to how you know that Obama isn't someone who doesn't care about suicides in the military. How do you know that he cares about that person's family members? You have given us nothing to prove your conjecture.
Red Rum thinks that Obama cares about the soldiers who committed suicide, both in Iraq and Afghanistan and in this country. One has to wonder if Red Rum may have drunk too much rum before making that insipid argument. The simple fact of the matter is that if Obama actually gave a damn about those soldiers [not to mention the hundreds of Afghans who have been ripped to pieces by US bombs] he would not have placed them in that most untenable position in the first place. Instead of attacking Ms. Goodman for raising this most important issue, Mr. Red Rum would be better served if he realized that Obama, like Bush before him, bears the responsibility for those killed and that is because those deaths, American and Afghan and Iraqi and Pakistani, were all totally unnecessary. All the more reason why Obama and Bush and Cheney deserve to be tried as war criminals for the unjustifiable misery that they have caused, both to those soldiers and to the citizens of those third world countries who have felt the wrath and sting of American militarism.
"Insipid" from one person and "conjecture" from another. So much for respectful dialog. I guess that can't happen here.
You don't have to look far to see what Obama's done for veterans. He supports additional treatment for soldiers with PTSD including several members of Congress who's helping him along. Obama's not perfect, but I'm sure he cares about those who commit suicide from war. All you have to do is google. I found a lot that indicates this.
I'll leave it there.
No offense, Red Rum, but this is a case of Premature Flouncing.
I suspect that you expected your original post to be more warmly received. I use "warmly" in the sense of "sympathetically; affectionately", of course. I also think that you were blowing smoke, insofar as you didn't really think through or check out your dubious position in the first place, and weren't prepared to be called on it.
But merely being disputed and taken to task for lack of logic and substance is hardly uncivil or offensive, any more than calling a poker hand is.
To support a comments-board Flounce, one ought at least wait until one has actually been CALLED a twerp, or asshole, etc. That never happened!
Don't feel bad, though. Premature Flouncing is a common commenting dysfunction, and it's treatable. Even practice helps!
Yr Obd't Servant
Red Rum complains when I used the word insipid. I could also have used descriptive words such as vapid, flat, jejune, banal and inane to describe Red Rum's defense of Obama as that would have served the same purpose. Red Rum believes that Ms. Goodman did not "connect the dots" which is ironic since Red Rum himself has refused to connect the dots when I attempted to point out, apparently to no avail, that these soldiers would not have had to worry about dealing with the effects of PTSD if they had not been placed unnecessarily in a combat zone by Obama. He cannot state with any degree of credibility that Obama "cares about those who commit suicide from war" since Obama is the person who is directly responsible for their suffering. Obama may just as well have pulled that trigger which caused the death of that young soldier as he, again, is the one who should be held accountable for that young man's death as he [Obama] should have been aware that there was an extremely good chance that something bad could have happened to that young man.
I would also like to believe that I have engaged in "respectful dialog[ue]" toward Red Rum since I did not launch any ad hominem attacks against him unless he believes that if anyone dares to disagree with him [by my use of the word insipid] that that would qualify for the use of the term disrespectful dialogue. I think not.
BWAAAAAAAAAAAA HA HAAAAAAAAAAAAA communism has been a total failure everywhere it has been tried. And don't sat China is communist, they have property ownership. North Korea is communist, go live there. God bless the troops!
Thank you for a well-reasoned response. I was going to chastize the poster for his knee-jerk insulting response instead of asking you to further expand upon your ideas. It is the "communist" label that, because of six decades of propaganda, will hurt the cause. Already too many associate the word "socialism" with "communism" because of said propaganda.
Amy is among the best at airing news of war resisters, both those who work inside and outside the military. She has had many many on her show and exposed the actualities of their lives in combat and their reasons for refusing to participate. In contrast, most so-called news shows ignore soldiers except for vacuous surface sanctimony praising their service and sacrifice.
Resistance by soldiers is a serious symptom of a breakdown of mindless "patriotic" obedience. It means that the soldiery is less malleable and readily available to quell popular phenomenon here and in other countries. Is is an important component of any real possibility for any deep changes including the ones you desire. Resistance by soldiers to illegal and immoral acts is part of what will save lives and bring an end to wars. We should welcome and support such soldiers as our prodigal sons and daughters.
Joe
Rewind to Obama’s appointment to the Supreme Court of Sotomayer, when he asserted that his prime motivation in appointing a Supreme Court judge was a character trait called empathy. I was dumbfounded then, as I am now by this news. Juxtaposed against Obama’s rhetoric then, were news reports that unmanned drone strikes that snuffed out 190 non-combatants (women and children) in a small mountain village in Pakistan. As the news report paned the scene of small children strewn around the strike site starring blankly with eyes open, and their blood soaking into the ground, measured against Obama’s empty rhetoric of “empathy” strikes me as utter callousness by a empty suit like Obama, who is more concerned with a photo op on "empathy" then he is with the value of human life and those family memebers who carry on without support of a president who has no empathy.
What did Obama tell us when he was in Campaign mode? "I am a polotician doing things differently." In retrospect, that statement carries as much value as the marketing slogan, "change we can believe in."
The Sotomayor circus was yet another mere distraction from reality. It was another "crumb" to the Obama-bots to keep them loyal. I was so depressed by the news coming out of Afghanistan this morning and last night. Sometimes the pain is so great I have to turn off NPR. How can anyone not get it when the talk coming from the Taliban is that the latest attacks are in direct retaliation for the U.S. being in Afghanistan. And what is our response? Just dig in deeper. And for what? We're not fighting for the freedom of Afghanistan and we're not fighting for the safety of Americans. That's the just the big cover story for the uninformed or the masses too drugged up on Pharma garbage or just plain too lazy to open their eyes and ears. I scream every time I hear about how caring Obama is, what a moral person Obama is, a man of integrity. Pleeeeeese, spare me the BS!
Sioux Rose
SAMALABEAR: I share your pain, rage, frustration... and empathy.
Reading the book, "JFK & The Unspeakable, Why He Died and Why It Matters," I am coming to see how it was that Eisenhower warned about the growing power of the MIC back in l960. It seems that having dropped the big bombs over Japan, a segment of the military really went into a god-like hubris, and then aimed their almighty powers at maintaining that edge.
If you've ever hit someone out of turn, you kind of expect them to sooner or later hit back; and I think part of the motivation behind the monstrous US military machine is the unconscious guilt that sooner or later some power WILL kick back.
In any case, the decision after WW II to set up the CIA and grant it powers that kept it "working on the dark side" essentially paved the way for that covert government we often speculate about in this forum. In order to maintain "plausible deniability" on the part of the president, "leaders" in this realm made their own decisions about who to "take out," and what war they preferred to trigger. The chronicle of the degree to which these insidious forces went behind JFK's back to set up a trigger that might have led to WWIII in our own backyard (with Cuba) was not a one-shot deal that's been bandaged up or healed.
It's quite clear that this EXACT same mindset, that WANTS war, and cares not if it escalates to nuclear proportions (as seen in aggravating that likely outcome on the Afghanistan-Pakistan-India borders) is still in covert command.
All the media chiming about the rights of women (sure), or bringing democracy there, or improving lives there, or fighting "them" there rather than here, or as vengeance for 911 (ha)... are just public relations cover-ups. Aside from war being the force that gives these baboons' lives meaning, the PROFITS of the make-war state, and the resources it can confiscate are the real reasons behind this continuity of aggression.
Obama is the master of ceremonies, a decent enough performer, and one capable of wearing the costume and not being bothered much by the carnage. I presume persons like this convince themselves that wars have always gone on, and that it's not his role to change things around. If one reads the JFK book and sees, in contrast, the ideals and actions of a TRUE leader, one who really understands the premise of SERVING his constituents, along with the TERRIBLE risks (MIC/CIA/covert deciders willing to set this great green living sphere ablaze with death) then Obama is little more than an empty suit. Tragic at this particular interval... The killings of Bobby, Martin, and John plunged a dagger into the heart of the nation. More killing will never appease this wound.
I'm glad you're enjoying the Douglass book, SR. I read somewhere that he intends to expand the themes with books about RFK, MLK... and MX too, IIRC.
· Yr Obd't Servant
Sioux
OS: John Perkins is next! I don't think "enjoy" is the most fitting verb to describe my response to this work; however, I like to be as informed about the mundane sphere as I am about its higher reflection. Do you remember the quote from Merlin in "The Once and Future King," that your friends might betray you, your great love take off with another, your professional dream crash (I am offering an anotated version); but the one thing that endures is learning, thus one must apply the self to the tasks of learning how this world works, what wags the dog's tail and so forth. This forum works towards that objective in my mind. Thanks for contributing much to it. By the way, Peter Sellers, Charlie Chaplin, and Eddie Murphy are three Aries males who instead of going bombastic in typical Mars rules fashion, defused their fiery angst through comedy. Who but the fool can tell the king(dom) the truth (in the final analysis)? Humor therefore functions an excellent covert political tactic and would-be tool of statecraft!
"The Once and Future King" has been in my personal "canon" ever since I read it as a teenager. Though an agnostic freethinker, I also occasionally mutter misanthropically, "If there is one thing I can’t stand, it is stupidity. I always say that stupidity is the Sin against the Holy Ghost." I identify with Merlyn in lots of ways.
Incidentally, since as it happens I'm an Aries, I daresay I also defuse (or diffuse) my fiery angst through comedy.
· Yr Obd't Servant
"I also defuse (or diffuse) my fiery angst through comedy." –(Yr Obd't Servant)
–Making your postings among the only 'must' reads on the entire blog. Keep up the fun and the games too! The 'angst' makes it all worth while.
–(Jill Bains)
If Obama wants to send any condolences, he could start out by ending the wars for real. Why waste paper if the wars won't stop? I hate empty apologies !
Chancellor Keesling's death is another symptom of this most unnecessary war. Unfortunately his parents are under the delusion that Obama cares about the way his son died. They also seek acknowledgment from Obama that their "son gave his life in services to the causes of the United States [that are] important to us." They want assurance that their son did not die in vain. His parents, along with the rest of the military families, refuse to face the fact that their son died for a less than noble cause. They do not wish to believe that their son was used as cannon fodder by their uncaring government. But he was. The United States government simply does not care how many soldiers have to die or return to this country maimed and crippled or commit suicide in order to achieve their imperialistic aims.
Perhaps some day the Keeslings can put their fingers over their son's name on an Iraq War Memorial similar to the Vietnam War Memorial. But that will do little to lessen the fact that he died for absolutely no justifiable reason whatsoever. And still these military families will not accept that they and their loved ones have been used and violated by their government. They should ask themselves the question that Ralph Nader's father asked him when he was a child and that was: Ralph, did you learn to believe and accept what you were taught in school or did you learn to think? Likewise, these military families should finally ask themselves: Do they continue to automatically believe what the military and the government has told them or will they finally learn to think?
"Do they continue to automatically believe what the military and the government has told them or will they finally learn to think?"
You were doing great up to here. Do you honestly believe these people don't think? That they even believe what the government tells them? You simply continue to misunderstand the difference between those that wish to serve and those that don't. They have been betrayed here and if you don't know that many of them know it....you are not half as smart as I thought.
He died because of cowards that started a personal war on the cheap and because of a bunch of other cowards that kept troop levels so low that we have no choice but to send the same kids back time after time.
Yes Henry8, I have to believe that these military families refuse to think and to question and to challenge what the military and the government have done to their loved ones. Perhaps if you were not so busy waving the flag you just might notice that there are extremely few military families that express outrage at what the US government has done to their husbands and sons and wives and daughters. You claim that they have been betrayed. Then, as I have attempted to point out, why have not more of them expressed solidarity with Cindy Sheehan and the Gold Star Families?
These military families who meekly accept the American flag from a military representative at the funeral of their family members have been brainwashed into believing that their son or husband or brother had died for some ambiguous or noble cause. If they actually, as you claim, were engaged in critical thinking, then what they should have done was to have thrown that American flag back in the face of that military representative and curse the military and the government for having caused their loved ones to die for absolutely no justifiable reason whatsoever. But they refuse to do that because they do not wish to face the reality that their relatives had been used as cannon fodder by their most uncaring government.
I had seen this happen during the Vietnam conflict and am seeing it happen again in the 21st century. These military families do not wish to believe, as you say, that they have been betrayed. But they have and yet the vast majority of them refuse to condemn the government for bringing their loved ones back in a body bag. Again, where the hell is their outrage?
You claim that "He died because of cowards that started a war on the cheap..." which totally ignores the fact that both "wars" [which were never, like the Vietnam conflict, authorized by Congress] never should have been conducted in the first place. It doesn't matter how many troops should have sent into Afghanistan and Iraq. They never should have been there in the first place as both the Afghans and the Iraqis have been defending, justifiably, their countries from their American occupiers.
Regarding your less than intelligent comment, you are not nearly as smart as you seem to believe as your delusions and myopia and super patriotism keep getting in the way of whatever logic and reason that you may happen to possess.
A powerful posting.
The very 'culture' of the military family precludes 'thinking' critically about the nature of war in modern America. It is the received wisdom, where literally all wars are good, and ANY war cannot be questioned. It is implacably lodged in the domain of the irrational. So much so, it has become a kind of private morality or private ideology.
If ever there will be real changes in America there will have to be breeches– violent internecine upheavals –if not revolts–within the military itself.
Regrettably, the 'Chritianization' of the military proceeds as an almost a quasi 'official' program. The separation of 'church and state' has all but become a fiction in the military. This right wing militancy has no countervailing oppositional force or ideology acting as an antidote against it.
The military mindset is now 'cordoned off' as if in an impenetrable bubble, that defaults to itself alone, in a discrete almost parallel universe beyond cultural and political 'influence.' Like American wars themselves, it seems to have a life of its own, and gestates automatically.
This, almost intractable consciousness, coupled with the de facto and deliberate destruction of public education in America, points ineluctably to a dystopian future where the default position is fascism.
In the onset of a totalized economic and institutional crisis in America, the military– at all costs and in spite of any contingencies– will be the 'last man standing.' Permanent war no longer has to have a rationale or a point; it is the event horizon of the American ethos and subsumes everything.
–(Jill Bains)
Speaking of "Christianization", learning that armed forces suicides don't merit a presidential condolence letter to families was mildly surprising.
But it immediately evoked the traditional Roman Catholic church policy of refusing to allow suicides to be buried in consecrated ground because suicide is a grievous sin-- a "mortal" sin, if one can stand the irony.
I presume that a parallel rationalization explains the military's formally unsympathetic response to suicide; the cannon fodder that destroys itself is doing the "enemy"'s work for it! Given this rigid, two-dimensional thinking, suicide is the equivalent of desertion, even treason! The suicide manifestly did not die in a state of martial grace!
Ergo, it isn't "proper" for a Commander-in-Chief to express civilized condolences. Creepy, huh? But not a tradition that this president is sufficiently enlightened to break. Maybe it's on his Second Term To-Do List.
Besides, it would be bad for morale-- all of the soldiers who HAVEN'T committed suicide don't get a fancy presidential letter sent to their families! Naturally, they would feel resentful and envious towards suicide's families who think they're so special.
Conversely, the policy protects against EVERYBODY rushing to commit suicide, knowing that their families would be privileged to receive correspondence from the Warlord of Warlords, the Amerikan Imperialist Armed Forces Commander-in-Chief.
There would be no one left to kill or be killed, and obviously we can't have THAT!
Sigh.
· Yr Obd't Servant
Excellent post! The one thing I have so much trouble stomaching is the constant parrotting by the MSM and local news channels that these troops are "protecting our country" or "defening our freedom." This is utter bullshit! These troops, many of whom I honestly believe enlisted in good faith to help protect the country against terrorism, have been defrauded in the most dispicable ways. They, along with the rest of the nation, were lied to by a man so small he believed he needed a war to go down in the history books as a "wartime" and therefore effective president. Our troops are protecting nothing more than corporate interests in both Afganistan and Iraq. Anyone with any knowledge of the truth knows that Iraq had nothing at all to do with 9/11, and Afganistan had even made the offer to hand Bin Laden over if only we could provide evidence that he was involved. These troops have died for a lie, and their families deserve the closure that would be provided by immediate trials for both war crimes and treason followed by immediate punishment for those who sold these wars under false preteneses.
God bless you for speaking the truth. Corporate interests or no, this is a worthless war that serves no one of worth.
Sioux Rose
AUSSI: Right on! You'd think Cindy Sheehan raising the question of the grieving Mother, demanding to know what her son died for, would have woken up these other parents who still see our military as a viable professional option for their sons and daughters in an economy brought to its knees in part to force militarism (as career path) on the citizenry. Talk about a sickening and suicidal catch-22... it's so sad that too many don't get it, till tragedy knocks on their personal doors.
"...it's so sad that too many don't get it, till tragedy knocks on their personal doors." –(Sioux Rose)
–Sioux Rose, I don't think even the 'tragedy' you speak of can put a dent in or exorcise the demons that are a point of willful pride within the death culture itself: Those 'demons' are obdurate and run rough shod over concepts of 'personal loss.' I think sadness is inappropriate and misspent on their ilk. In a way such sympathy becomes 'sentimentality' and softens the political will necessary to ultimately defeat the 'war spirits' which these people thrive on.
When the Cindy Sheehan event first gained media traction, it should be remembered that she was excoriated by other military parents who were prideful their offspring had died serving war and imperial fascism. To these people Cindy was a wimp and a 'commie.'
In a way and in part, they are brutally right. Their losses are not tragic or inevitable but are considered desirable and ultimately, matters of choice. They do not ask for sympathy and should be accorded none. In fact, they resent sympathy. They are prideful in celebrating the deaths of their offspring. Such sympathy is indeed seen as a sign of weakness, and in truth it is: Not a weakness of the human spirit but of politics.
It is deeply ironic that those progressives who offer 'condolences' to the imperial war dead will one day realize–that those whom they reach out to in a shared communion of mourning–will have little compunction when caving in their 'commie' heads during a crisis of state. And the fascists will proceed to laugh in their faces.
We should save our sympathies for the war resistors, the traitors, the defectors, the refuseniks and those people who fought against, not for American imperial fascism. The 'death culture' in America cannot be ended by coddling it but by hardening opposition to it.
The right wing mosquito, the troll called 'the owl' says, "God bless the troops!" When we participate in that, we are invoking what is best in us to instigate our own self-immolation.
–(Jill Bains)
Sioux Rose
GOOD EVENING, Jill: I copied and pasted your post to add to my file, "Mars rules." You have a very profound laser-sharp power of analysis, and I suppose my "sentimentality" and sense of sadness/sorrow at times bleeds over my logic. I'd like to think wisdom is finding a balance between the state of sheer heart-felt empathy and that of incisive analytical penetration.
You raise great points. One wonders if the defensiveness in families who have "proudly" lost a soldier son or daughter is not some kind of almost organic wall propped up so that the individual never has to search their soul, spend time with conscience, or examine their belief system.
I've brought this analogy up in the forum before, that I live close to Rosewood, Florida where a particularly disgusting massacre took place one night. The local poor whites resented the relative peace and comfort of a small, independent Black community and sought to spontaneously murder all of its inhabitants one night. A little girl, today an elderly woman, got away and bore witness to the savage events. I probably run into the offspring of those who were involved in that massacre, and their racism remains brick-thick. To own the wound, to face the dark heart of one's ancestors I think is more frightening for some then being present to the barbarity of the present. How many little boys get excited about military parades, hear the stories of their fathers, uncles, grandfathers, and believe it is their destiny to grow up to also become warriors?
In addition, America established on July 4 expresses (unconsciously, this operating as an archetypal energy pattern that runs deep) as a Cancer entity, and this in part explains why the national psyche holds an obsession with the past and filial ties. In this land of authoritarians, tradition is king. By this way of thinking and behaving, one lives in the past, repeats its mistakes endlessly as a passive tribute to one's ancestors. To actually embrace change, especially of any sort radical enough to depart substantially from the parents'(or grandparents') "blueprint," is to show disrespect. It is frowned upon, shunned by the group. (Have you ever read Shirley Jackson,'s "The Lottery?" It is brilliant on this theme.)
I have on occasion stopped at a rural redneck gas station straight out of Central Casting to avoid driving on empty, and when I looked momentarily into the eyes of the hard working men, what I see is emptiness, vacuous souls who depend upon their 6-packs and 12-packs and TV sports to get through another day. The lives of quiet desperation are on view. Plausibly what robs persons of life and the potential joys of living is this need to validate one's ancestors by repeating THEIR script.
I much appreciate your mention of the evangelical aspect of today's military. Few understand how insidious this force has become. This angelic looking teenage girl who worked at the local Winn Dixie checkout counter proudly boasted that she was about to leave for Iraq, the gold cross hung prominently in view from her tiny neck. She was no doubt led to believe this was a holy war and she would be doing her part for her religion, or nation, or some other fiction that will likely result in her getting killed, maimed, raped, or at the least... broken-spirited upon exposure to the endlessly dark calmity that war is.
I find your posts evocative. Thank you for taking the time to share in this forum.
Thanks Sioux, your posting was even more powerful yet. No one on this blog distills as much feeling into their postings as you do. I understand– that you above all others– would find it very difficult to harden one's better instincts and sacrifice a depth of feeling in order to embrace a purely political consciousness. I was not, in any way being critical or chiding you, but commenting on the dangers of sentimentality in general. See your around the neighborhood. –(Jill Bains)
Sioux Rose
Jill: When I was in junior high school and high school, there was a fellow student named Lynne who was beautiful, always scored a point or two higher than me on every test, and was a better gymnast than me. I loved her and felt no competition, in fact, she was the ideal I aspired towards. She had a grace that few do. I think you could be like Lynne.
One of the reasons I have studied astrology is that some very very painful things happened to Lynne in her life, and we met at the 10th and 20th high school reunions and later discussed these oddities. Just as wines take their quality from their year of vintage, there is something to be said about the galaxy of factors that impress upon the lifescripts of those who "enter" this strange earth journey together, time-wise.
There was a person who acted as Lynne's nemesis, and where possible, my own. This girl's father was later arrested for government corruption, and she apparently was a chip off the old block. The girl was like a born Karl Rove, quite powerful in using false accusation and calumny to harm others that I suppose she mostly just envied. I don't think the devil himself could have found any fault with Lynne, but the "Rove" clone went after her. Lynne had loving parents, and they hosted great birthday parties. But "Rove" managed to call enough people to convince them not to attend one such event.
I am relating this because just as Hollywood's characters are easily identifiable because although their story lines might be unique, we know persons JUST LIKE THEM in our everyday walks of life (or within our families), that here in this forum we find that those of Light and intelligence are attacked, and then in their earnest efforts to defend themselves, what they believe in, they are further accused by their accusers of taking on the very characteristics they are sworn against.
I send you a sincere "Namaste." I do not think I could debate with you without needing a dictionary, but I would welcome the challenge represented by such a feat. Like Lynne, that you excel in medicine, the art of polemic, and music while raising a child are all admirable. I applaud persons of either gender who act as today's Renaissance men and women. In this new dark age, the world needs what light and courage we can muster.
And I also want to second the motion that Obedient Servant's savvy postings are always worth reading. Your response means a lot to me. It's been a tough few weeks.
Nicely stated.
During the Vietnam era the peace movement asked the question: What if the had a war and nobody showed up?
This is the question every American should be asking today.
The way things are going in Ir-Af-Pak Obama will soon need to appoint a condolence czar to sign all the cards.