
![]() | |
October 2012
August 2012 July 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003
|
Greetings! You are reading an article from The Mudville Gazette. To reach the front page, with all the latest news and views, click the logo above or "main" below. Thanks for stopping by! February 24, 2004 What did you do in the War?By GreyhawkJohn Edwards hasn't accepted Hugh Hewitt's offer to co-host; looks like the honorable Mr. Edwards has eyes on the VP prize. (Or '08) Two results: 1) John Kerry will cruise without opposition to the Democratic nomination and 2) I had time for a fairly long on-air talk with Hugh (thank you, sir). This being a slow year for news we discussed Blogopoly (Hugh is calling for a boycott because Aaron hasn't created a game piece for him yet). After exhausting that topic we turned to John Kerry. Hugh doesn't feel he has the credentials to speak on a veteran's war service (an attitude Terry McAuliffe would do well to adopt) and didn't want that to be the focus of his show. But after my call about 5 other vets/active duty guys called in from all over the country on the same topic, then time ran out on the show. John Kerry. Increasingly, mention of Kerry is prefaced with "Of course, no one's questioning his service, it's afterwards..." Or "That's ancient history!" Because in addition to "Bush was AWOL" these are the Democrat's campaign slogans this year: "Ancient History" and "Shut up - you never served!" And so far they seem to be working. A recent Gallup Poll reveals these numbers: Americans who think Kerry did his duty for his country in Vietnam: 68% Americans who know what Kerry did in Vietnam: 49% Americans aware of Kerry's anti-war activities after he returned from Vietnam: 39% And it's not ancient history because the man's entire life has been an orchestrated quest for the White House. There are many very good reasons why the Senator from Massachusetts is declaring all that "off the table". But every one of these figures is an insult to military people everywhere. Because of Kerry's whining, foot stomping demands that no one who hasn't served can question his service. Fair enough, Senator. Now lets begin. Snopes has posted a brief history of the Senator's Swift Boat service here. And we're going to look it over together here through the next couple of days. It could be easy to accuse anyone of "using the left's own tactic" in this issue, but that's not the case. Kerry and McAuliffe opened the door - Bush AWOL was a lie, and the issues about Kerry's service are facts. I'd go so far as to speculate that the Bush/AWOL issue might have been designed to desensitize the public to the coming questions about Kerry's service. They are just starting to emerge, but this issue will grow. What did you do in the War, Kerry? We're going to lower that 61% number. We'll raise the rest. Posted by Greyhawk / February 24, 2004 5:11 AM | Permalink 10 Comments |
November 26, 2010America@war [Greyhawk]
I think anyone who's ever pondered the "comment" option - once only available on blogs and bulletin boards, now ubiquitous on almost any web site - will appreciate this:
The so-called faculty of writing is not so much a faculty of writing as it is a faculty of thinking. When a man says, "I have an idea but I can't express it"; that man hasn't an idea but merely a vague feeling. If a man has a feeling of that kind, and will sit down for a half an hour and persistently try to put into writing what he feels, the probabilities are at least 90 percent that he will either be able to record it, or else realize that he has no idea at all. In either case, he will do himself a benefit. That's wisdom from the past, captured for posterity at the US Naval Institute, shared via the web on the institute's 137th anniversary. From their about page:
"The Naval Institute has three core activities," among them, History and Preservation: The Naval Institute also has recently introduced Americans at War, a living history of Americans at war in their own words and from their own experiences. These 90-second vignettes convey powerful stories of inspiration, pride, and patriotism. Take a look at the collection, and you'll see it's not limited to accounts from those who served on ships at sea, members of the other branches are well-represented. I'm fortunate to have met USNI's Mary Ripley, she's responsible for the institute's oral history program (and she's the daughter of the late John Ripley, whose story is told here). She also deserves much credit for their blog. ("We're not the Navy nor any government agency. Blog and comment freely.") We met at a milblog conference - Mary knew (and I would come to realize) that milbloggers are the 21st-century version of exactly what the US Naval Institute is all about. Once that light bulb came on in my head, I mentioned a vague idea for a project to her - milblogs as the 21st century oral history that they are. "Put that in writing," she said (of course - see first paragraph above!) - and here's part of the result. Shortly after the first tent was pitched by the American military in Iraq a wire was connected to a computer therein, and the internet was available to a generation of Americans at war - many of whom had grown up online. From that point on, at any given moment, somewhere in Iraq a Soldier, Sailor, Airman or Marine was at a keyboard sharing the events of his or her day with the folks back home. While most would simply fire off an email, others took advantage of the (then) relatively new online blogging platforms to post their thoughts and experiences for the entire world to see. The milblog was born - and from that moment to this stories detailing everything from the most mundane aspects of camp life to intense combat action (often described within hours of the event) have been available on the web... And et cetera - but since you're reading this on a milblog, you probably knew that. And you know that milblogs aren't just blogs written by troops at war, that many friends, family members, and supporters likewise documented their story of America at war online in near-real time, as those stories developed. The diversity in membership of that group is broad, the one thing we all have in common is the impulse to make sense of the seemingly senseless, and communicate the tale - for each of us that impulse was strong enough to overcome whatever barriers prevent the vast majority of people from doing the same. Everyone at some point has some vague idea they believe should be shared - we were the people who, from some combination of internal and external urging, found and spent those many half hours persistently trying to write it down. But where will all that be in another 137 years? Or five or ten, for that matter. That's something I've asked myself since at least 2004 - when I wrote this:
Membership in the ghost battalion has grown in the years since, and an ever growing majority of those abandoned-but-still-standing sites are vanishing. Have you checked out Lt Smash's site lately? How about Sgt Hook's? If you're a long-time milblog reader you know the first widely-read milblog from Operation Iraq Freedom and the first widely-read milblog from Afghanistan are both gone from the web. If you're a relative newcomer to this world you may never even have heard of them - or the dozens upon dozens of others who carried forth the standard they set down. If you have a vague notion that something should be done about that, (a notion I've heard expressed more than once...) then you and I and the good folks at the US Naval Institute are in agreement. Preserving the history documented by the milbloggers is just one of the goals of the milblog project, the once-vague idea that we're now making real. And it's a big idea, if I say so myself - too big to explain in one simple blog post, so stand by for more. Likewise, it's too big a task to be accomplished by just one person. So if you're a milblogger (and exactly what is a milblogger? is a topic for much further discussion on its own) I'm asking for your help. All I'll really need is just a little bit (maybe just one or two of those half hours...) of your time, and your willingness to tell the tale. We've already made history, it's time to save it. (More to follow...) Posted 4:02 PM | Permalink |
Comments (0) |
|
The Mudville Gazette is the on-line voice of an American warrior and his wife who stands by him. They prefer to see peaceful change render force of arms unnecessary. Until that day they stand fast with those who struggle for freedom, strike for reason, and pray for a better tomorrow.
![]() Furthermore, I will occasionally use satire or parody herein. The bottom line: it's my house. I like having visitors to my house. I hope you are entertained. I fight for your right to free speech, and am thrilled when you exercise said rights here. Comments and e-mails are welcome, but all such communication is to be assumed to be 1)the original work of any who initiate said communication and 2)the property of the Mudville Gazette, with free use granted thereto for publication in electronic or written form. If you do NOT wish to have your message posted, write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the subject line of your email. Original content copyright © 2003 - 2011 by Greyhawk. Fair, not-for-profit use of said material by others is encouraged, as long as acknowledgement and credit is given, to include the url of the original source post. Other arrangements can be made as needed. Contact: greyhawk at mudvillegazette dot com ![]() Tending Distant Far from hearth and home, watching What tales we'll tell When things grim Some distant sunset, vision fading Saluting fallen friends whose names - Greyhawk, Baghdad, December 2004 |
That report states that the VC got up after he was shot in the leg by a .50 cal, and ran off.
absolute BS; a .50 at close range would have taken the whole leg off. there was no running option. The kid was mortally wounded at the least, and most likely flat out dead.
The wounds are relative scratches. When hit in the leg, he wasn't knocked over, and didn't even stumble.
The right arm was hit twice, and even after the second hit, it was good enough to pull a man out of the water alone?
This raises more questions than it answered.
And, yes, I have standing to question his story.
Good stuff!
"As generally understood, the Purple Heart is given to any U.S. citizen wounded in wartime service to the nation." -- snopes, quoting ...
I should have a couple of them, then, to go with my service-connected disability, but I don't. Training accident. Not worried about it.
Lots of medals were "easy" or inflated for some Navy folk then, as they (or their supervisors?) were feeling left out of the ribbon parade.
Nice article today in the NY Post about the US military. exerpt: "The American soldier is a historical anomaly - not a grasping conqueror, but a man or woman of courage and good heart who wishes only to do what must be done, and then go home. Our troops are inspiring in ways that no campaign speech or campus rally will ever rival. They live the virtues - courage, patriotism, love of freedom, self-sacrifice, honor - of which their critics are embarrassed to speak.
They have a wicked sense of humor. They're exuberantly politically incorrect. They're part of the most thoroughly integrated, representative American institution - our military. And when the American people and our leaders stand behind them, they can do any job on earth."
link: http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/18812.htm
for snopes to use ONLY whitewash sources (Boston Globe and his pet campaign commercial book) on Kerry's record is despicable, and contrary to their usual fine research.
from here on, I have that much less faith in snopes for anything
There is MORE than enough evidence to refute this paltry PC revisionist history
Kerry is a patriotic American, a lot like a flag, some days he waves to the right and sometimes to the left . all depends on the winds. I think you can catch the sarcasm in this statement.
And I served 24 years 1 month and 4 days, and while i won't question his military service it IS what happened after and it IS a mater of record, and it IS a NOT getting my vote
I'm glad you're doing this Greyhawk. I thought it was amusing that the left got on their high horses about the Snopes "rebuttal" of my post, not even noticing that it quoted exactly the same Boston Globe piece I did :) to supposedly refute the charges that Kerry's heroism and medals were a tad inflated. People just don't bother to read carefully. The Snopes piece was sloppy and didn't even go to the point of the charges made against Kerry - that his wounds didn't merit early release from duty (technically he didn't do anything wrong, but ethically...that's a different question). And it didn't address the fact that there are men who were seriously wounded over there who didn't receive Purple Hearts.
And getting a Silver Star for rescuing one of your own guys who fell overboard is OK but it seems that he was doing his job - he was supposed to transport the guy, and if he fell overboard, you go back and pick him up. My father in law got a Bronze Star under similar conditions for going in under fire to pick up downed pilots (not his guys - they just picked up a radio signal). You explain the difference? There may have been more personal heroism in Kerry's case.
It is common knowledge that medals weren't handed out equitably in all cases over there - there were guys who did amazing things and never got recognized. I didn't see the Snopes article refuting anything except perhaps the charge that he couldn't have been wounded 3 times in 4 months, which I didn't take seriously anyway as a charge.
Hugh complained about no Blogopoly gamepiece and then acknowledged receiving one.
How does any of this make W Bush a better choice? Is his pitiful record of to be regarded as superior or a reason to vote for him? Nothing that happened to either man 35 years ago has any business being a part of that decision . Both men have changed, Bush was a drunken frat boy who grew up and Kerry got waxed by Boston Pols his first time out and became a prosecutor to earn his political strips. Iraq has become a mess and Afghanistan needs attention and why are were writing $75,000 tax refund checks to billionaires while borrowing money to finance the war?
I was an 11B with the 101st in 69-70-- they were both REMFs to us. I'm older now and just want some goddam answers about what's important now. I'd like to have McCain or Chuck Hegal in the White house but I don't have that choice.