
![]() | |
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! December 8, 2005 Is it Raining?By GreyhawkPresident Bush addresses the troops on the war in Iraq. Sound outrageous? No - but Fox News reports that "some" feel the President shouldn't be discussing "politics" with the GIs: WASHINGTON — Speeches by President Bush in recent weeks before military audiences about the Iraq war debate have raised questions about partisan issues being brought up in front of U.S. Armed Forces.James Taranto takes it from there, offering a fairly comprehensive round-up of Democratic attacks on the military over the past few days. (And spare me the " we support the troops" line - there's an old saying, "don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining" that applies.) My disgust with the Dems is centered on the fact that as a member of the US Armed Forces, subject to be deployed in harm's way, I want a loyal opposition to the administration - and they've failed in that responsibility. (Has any other American political party leader in history ever declared that the US was destined to lose a war we were involved in?) The approach indicated in this Fox story (they're positioning themselves for the inevitable backlash - see also here for a somewhat sane response) is yet another example of that failure - bash the military until they completely loose faith in you, then bash them for supporting your opposition. For the special "Democratic" touch try to incite a little fear in the electorate; give a mental image of "other" countries (nudge nudge wink wink, you know - "other" countries). Pathetic. How bad is it? Read this: Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, increasingly isolated in his own Democratic party because of his strong support for the Iraq war, today called on the White House and congressional leaders to form a special "war cabinet" to provide advice and direction for the war effort.First, three cheers for Senator Lieberman. But consider this: the situation has deteriorated to the point that he has to suggest a new organization that can do what the US Congress was once expected to do in time of war. (By the way, that story is several days old - had you heard about it? As Kathleen Parker notes, the news for weeks now has been Murtha, Murtha, Murtha, Murtha, Murtha, Murtha, (Lieberman), Murtha, Murtha, Murtha.) But before you start thinking there's still hope for them yet - his fellow Dems have already shot the idea down. And now back to Senator Murtha: "Very small proportion of the people that are involved in the insurgency are terrorists or how I would interpret them as terrorists."So why are a large majority of their attacks on Iraqi civilians? I mean, with all due respect sir, why the #%$^ are a large majority of their attacks on Iraqi civilians? BAGHDAD (AP) - A suicide bomber detonated explosives Thursday inside a packed bus bound for a southern Shiite city, killing 32 people and wounding 44, police said. The blast pushed the three-day death toll from suicide attacks in the capital to at least 75.Once more, for effect: Speeches by President Bush in recent weeks before military audiences about the Iraq war debate have raised questions about partisan issues being brought up in front of U.S. Armed Forces.Retired generals bashing the administration or tap dancing en masse across the stage at the Democratic National Convention disturb me much more deeply than do the 90% of GIs who support a sitting Commander in Chief. We can make up our own minds - and know when it's raining. Posted by Greyhawk / December 8, 2005 9:44 PM | Permalink 13 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 |
Hear Hear! Excellent post.
Amen - the dems have gone off the edge.
There's an aspect to this you missed. The military is predominantly Republican, because the Democrats have abandoned the military in more ways then one. Not until there's a draft - meaning until they're forced to serve - will you see more than a handful of Democrats in uniform. Eighty percent of the military voted last year, and 80% of them voted for Bush.
When is the last time you heard a President, ANY President, speak before a potentially hostile audience? I don't think that having the President live in echo chamber is such a great idea either.
The Faker in Chief was a deserter during Vietnam, and now he's too cowardly to speak in front of anyone but his fellow nazis. As for the military being Republicans, that's definitely true of the officers. When it comes to the enlisted, I think the Republicans are the ones who get off on torturing people.
Caution to readers: I'm not sure whether Wilson is a Republican playacting to discredit Democrats or an actual, uh, whatever it is he is.
His comments are consistent with many I've seen on left wing extremist sites - so whatever he is, there are plenty more like him out there.
Hey Greyhawk, I noticed this comment of yours:
Retired generals bashing the administration or tap dancing en masse across the stage at the Democratic National Convention disturb me much more deeply than do the 90% of GIs who support a sitting Commander in Chief. We can make up our own minds - and know when it's raining.
So, back in what was it? 1998? When Republican retired generals were dancing across the TV screens on the very first day of the Kosovo deployment to condemn the operation and predict defeat, were you out there whining about it?
Didn't think so! See, your "milblog" has nothing whatsoever to do with the military. You couldn't possibly care any less than you do about the war, the country, freedom or the welfare of the troops. You and your amen chorus are partisan operatives who have hijacked "patriotism" for partisan purposes -- whatever the cost in blood that you will never pay.
Wilson, you're answering for me and arguing against the answer you fabricated for me.
There's a difference between "appearing on TV" and showing up in force to surround a presidential candidate like some sort of Praetorian Guard at his convention.
As to any exact quotes from your TV "stars", I'd have to read or hear them before I could respond. See paragraph one above.
Ooops, just re-read your question, and actually I can answer:
No, I've never whined about anything.
THREE weeks ago "MURTHA" put up a bill to take the TROOPS to the boarders of IRAQ, the REPUBLICANS re-wrote there way and PASSED IT 403 TO 3 " STAY THE COUSE".
A REPULIBICAN REP. called "MURTHA A COWARD" but what I didn't SEE or HEAR REPUBLICANS and DEMOCRTES on the FLOOR of the SENATE and CONGRESS ask the YOUMG ENLISTMENT AGE VOTERS in HIS or HER STATE " YOUR COUNTRY NEEDS YOU PLEASE
ENLIST TODAY.
NOR did i hear them say HE or SHE will tell there own ENLISTMENT AGE CHILDREN AMERICA NEEDS YOU TO.
OUR TROOPS IN IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN have servied our COUNTRY DEPLOYED and REDEPLOYED MANY TIMES ,
its time for them to be brought HOME and REPLACED BY NEW and FREASH TROOPS.
YOU OWE YOUR COUNTRY SOMETHING and NOW its TIME to give back.
AFTER 2,384 U.S. KILLED AND OVER 17,000 U.S.WOUNDED ITS TIME THE "FEW" THAT FOUGHT FOR THE MANY COME HOME.
I'M STILL WAITING TO SEE AND HEAR AMERICA SPEAK.
The Dems are up to their usual tricks. Just like 30 some years ago in Vietnam.
They are truly anti-american. The liberal mindset cannot fathom good news about Iraq or get a grip on individual rights!
I know that this is a little off topic but recently there was a 5-4 decision in the Supreme Court that basicly says you as a citizen do not have the right to private property!
Yep, your property can be condemmed through eminate domain and then turned over to a private developer as long as it is for the "common good". And it was the LIBERAL wing in the court the voted against us citizens! Why is this related to Iraq?
Because it is the liberal who wants our entire system, our representitive republic, to fail! The best way is to limit our rights and destroy the credibility and morale of our military. They want us to be subjects, not citizens!
And oh, by the way for any "trolls" who are monitoring I'm a disabled Army Vet from DS and if my country call's I'll answer the phone!
As usual, Steve is a lying rightwingnut. In the Supreme Court case to which he refers. three of the five justices in the majority were appopinted by Republicans. You nutcases can't tell the truth about one single thing, no matter what it is. Snowstorm! The liberals did it! You're a joke.
I wrote a post and as always the next post is about the courts and the LIBERAL PARTY.IF STEVE is waiting for the call all well and good, but he dose not hear his own words " he is disable" no insult. BUT if he is called upon we are in deep trouble that means we have lost all of our best.
LIBERAL are AMERICANS we love our country, and our TROOPS and with an ALL VOLUNTEER SERVICE we should not send them into HARMS WAY ILL-EQUIPED, UNDER MANED, SHORT PROTECTIVE GEAR and thinking they are FIGHTING a WAR AGAINST WMDS, CHEMICAL WEPOINS AND A FEAR OF A MUSHROOM CLOUD OVER THERE COUNTRY.
SENCE the WAR the same UNITS have DEPLOYED and
REDEPLOYED, STIVE has no trouble with the none ENLISTMENT OF OTHER AMERICANS to REPLACE, or to BRING HOME THE FEW that continues the fight as others sit by.
WE don't have a DRAFT so the "FEW GOOD MEN and WOMAN must hold the FRONT LINE, DAILY FACE DEATH AND WOUNDS and know there will be NO REPLACEMENTS,NO RELIFE. And that the only way HOME may be in a sippered black bag.
BUT AT HOME AMERICANS HAVE ONE BIG QUESTION :
SAVE THE GREETING "MERRY CHRISTMAS" IN STEAD OF "HAPPY HOLIDAY"