
![]() | |
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! March 26, 2004 Through the Past, Very DarklyBy GreyhawkIn another ring of the circus that was the recent 911 Commission Hearings, slightly away from the bookseller's table where the spotlight's glare brought beads of sweat to discredited "terrorism expert" Richard Clarke, former Nebraska Senator Bob Kerry asked former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger why former President Bill Clinton didn't lead America in an invasion of Afghanistan near the end of the last millennium (audio available here). Sandy Berger: I do not believe that this country was ready to invade Afghanistan before Sep 11, notwithstanding the fact we had a President who in 1996 said "This is... this is the challenge of our generation, this is the threat of our generation... Bob Kerry: I just... I don't... I mean... you... you persuaded the American people that military effort was necessary in Bosnia. You didn't have the House of Representatives with you; you barely had a majority in the Senate. You persuaded the American people that war was necessary to get Slobodan Milosevic to stop uh, his terror uh... in Kosovo... Berger: Yea, and we also had 19 Democracies in NATO in both of (chuckling) those cases that were standing with us together... Kerry: But I'm saying, the point is only that, if you... the argument that I find to be most unpersuasive is to say "we couldn't have gotten it done because nobody would have been with us" Did you catch it? The insight into the thinking of some people on matters of national security? Let me paraphrase, and you can use the comments to tell me if I'm being fair. Berger: We couldn't invade Afghanistan, America wouldn't have it. Kerry: But you went to war in Bosnia and Kosovo without initial popular support. Berger: Yes but we had foreign countries supporting us. Did I get it right? Yes, America was against it, but it was popular overseas. Said matter-of-factly, as if no additional explanation was needed. "Well, certainly, but Europe called and we came running. You see, that eliminates all consideration of what the unwashed masses of Americans want. We'll tell them what they want" (Chuckle) Have I stretched it too far yet? I think not. That mind set is pervasive in today's Democratic Party, and you can hear it echo in Kerry's comments about going to war without allies, and in Jimmy Carter's poisonous attacks on our nation's unbending willingness to defend itself (in spite of Europe's desires to the contrary). “I think the basic reason was made not in London but in Washington,” he said. “I think that Bush Jr was inclined to finish a war that his father had precipitated against Iraq. They can't always hide it: "America first" is an acceptable phrase only if preceded by the words "hate" or "blame". "I am deeply concerned that our leadership today has been eroded by global doubts about our government's commitment to the basic principles of truth, peace and human rights," Carter said. "We see trust and friendship toward the United States at its lowest point in history." Want to name those "respected leaders", Mr. Carter? Could they be Kerry's "foreign leaders" too? This is why John Kerry must swear repeatedly that he would never betray American interests to foreign powers: because he will. On March 21 2003, in the early days of the Iraq war, with success as yet uncertain, 48 countries were committed to the coalition. Along with Congress. Oh, and the American people. Posted by Greyhawk / March 26, 2004 3:14 PM | Permalink 8 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 |
A war "That his father had precipitated?"
You have got to be kidding me.
What a national treasure that man is! Lets put him in a museum.
Up until this point I thought Jimmy Carter had went a long way in clearing his name as a horrid President.
Up until this point, keywords.
He's out of office. Clinton is out of office. Tax breaks? Lets stop paying for Slick Willies office in Manhatten.
The Democratic party needs to get over itself and join the real world.
"This is why John Kerry must swear repeatedly that he would never betray American interests to foreign powers: because he will."
He has. Repeatedly. Beginning in 1971, if I have my dates correct.
I'd like to propose a break from long standing naval tradition. When the USS Jimmy Carter (SSN-23) is commissioned, I suggest that, rather than breaking a bottle of champagne over the bow, we instead launch Jimmy out of a tube.
What's next, the "Benedict Arnold" main battle tank?
"discredited" means being disliked by neocons and right-wing bloggers.
No, James, "discredited" means getting caught making statements motivated by spite, financial gain and/or a quest for fame which are demonstrated to be blatantly contradictory from one's previously stated position, assessment or opinion.
Mike M, you nailed the distinction. It is greed, cupidity, lust for limelight and a startling lack of common decency, coupled with an overweening desire to GET ELECTED ANYBODY but BUSH, which is leading more and more mealy-mouthed bone-brains to discredit themselves as Clarke has done.
Clarke, apparently, is on his way to a perjury charge, having stated under oath several items he stated, under oath earlier, were not so...
This is the era of Googling, Copernicking and, damn! Ixquick on the slapdown!
I believe that the former Nebraska senator spells his family name Kerrey. It's Bob Kerrey, just so no one misunderstands the statement or so people are not pulling a fast one.
In my view Mike M I can't see how you can make your statements other than just repeating others' charges as the classified documents have not yet been published and there is a hardly any likihood of a perjury conviction.