 |  |
 
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! May 24, 2006 The Adventures of Jesse and JackBy GreyhawkThe modern Leftist is poorly educated, extremely gullible, and easily (mis)led. Few other lessons are as starkly obvious as this conclusion from the Jesse MacBeth story. In such a situation it becomes difficult to discern who was the con man, who else was "in on it", and who were the conned, but clearly this week a large number of people were quite willingly duped by a third-rate phony. This is not the first time so many have been so taken in by so obvious a fraud. At some point they may wise up, but thus far like aging children at Christmas they "want to believe". While the video has disappeared from it's original site, you can still read the words that introduced Jesse to the world: There is a current story in the US press about a squad of Marines that are being investigated for "war crimes" after they murdered a whole Iraqi family one night a few months back. US officials are approaching this story as if this wasn't standard procedure, and are focusing on holding the individual Marines accountable. Jessie Macbeth blows the lid off that story.Actually US officials have had no comment on the Marine story as yet - to do so could prejudice the case. But those words quoted above have spread - to the pro-terrorist uruknet, the Smirking Chimp (don't laugh - it's a popular "liberal" site) and to countless smaller blogs like The Left Coaster. At that last site in particular, the obvious connection was made to this story: Former U.S. colonel John Murtha acknowledged in his Pentagon report Wednesday on the Haditha incident in Iraq that the U.S. Marines 'killed innocent civilians in cold blood'.Ironically - or perhaps not - the blogger chose to link the Xinhuanet version of the John Murtha story. From small blogs to Chinese news agencies, the stories spread globally. Make no mistake about it - Jack Murtha's pronouncement of guilt in the case of the Marines (here's the al Jazeera coverage) set the stage for the viral spread and eager acclaim for Jesse MacBeth's video debut. This is not to say the congressman was involved in the con - he was quite busy accepting an award for his "courage" this week. But while they might not be "battle buddies" the symbiotic relationship between the ex-Marine and his admirers - as indicated in that original introduction to the MacBeth video fraud - is undeniable. Nor would I imply the congressman is wrong. The honorable Mr Murtha was simply "getting ahead of the news cycle” as we say these days. In the military justice system investigations are conducted, preliminary hearings are held, and a decision is made whether a trial will follow. In the case of the Marines we are still in the investigation stage. But in courageously declaring their guilt at this point Mr Murtha has 1) perhaps duped those who weren’t paying attention into believing this is something he exposed, 2) ensured that the future news stories of the findings, the hearings, and the trials will include a mention of or quotes from congressman Jack Murtha, and 3) inspired a young Wendy's employee to make his mark on the world too. So perhaps the congressman will comment on this: Macbeth is a former US Army Ranger, who served in Iraq for 16 months before being wounded and ultimately discharged. His squad did night raids, using the same techniques the Marines are accused of, 4 or 5 times a night for many months. Macbeth, who is now a member of "Iraq Veterans Against the War," was interviewed for the public access TV show "Indymedia Presents."We now know that MacBeth was protesting coffee in Arizona at that time. And some of us knew at a glance that he was never a Ranger. For some time I've been trying to come up with a more apt term for the now widely misused "liberal", and gullible seems an excellent choice. I fear they will get fooled again. And again. And again... Posted by Greyhawk / May 24, 2006 11:02 PM | Permalink 16 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 |
Greyhawk,
When will you tone down the partisan rhetoric? Duh ... Macbeth is a fraud and the 99% of folks grounded in reality will readily concede this point when they are informed of WHY we can tell he is a fraud: photo, uniform, timeline discrepancies, stuttering etc.
I think the real problem here is the growing civil-military disconnect in which an increasingly smaller and smaller segment of our population has ANY connection with the military. The left and right are both guilty (in differing ways) of falling into this trap. How many folks on the right swallow Victor Davis Hanson and James Jay Carafano's exhortations that everything is fine on the Army's personnel front? Too many. How many blindly parrot Schoomaker's "transformation" spiel without looking at the second and third order effects that repeated deployments/personnel turbulance have had on several of our core competencies ie. Company/battalion level maneuver and Battalion/Brigade Air Assault ops.
I guess what I'm saying is expect more of this ... a lot more ... in the future. Not just on blatently political topics. The civil-military disconnect is real, growing and a threat to both our nation and those asked to serve in its name.
IRR Soldier - that's why I still think the draft would do our country a world of good.
Draft???
Hell no.
I would rather have 2 volunteers I can trust covering my back than 20 draftees.
I would have a better chance of getting killed trying to cover for people who refuse to fight.
The argument for the draft is that we need to reduce the overall quallity of our troops so that our enemys can get in shouting distance of US and kill more of our people.
P.S. Most of the modern countries that still have the draft are phasing it out for the same reason. It reduces overall competency. (Only as strong as the weakest link.)
this is something...
Bush Marks Inauguration of Iraq's New Cabinet
The Marine corps Times is reporting 12 Marines facing courts martial. http://marinetimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1823925.php As for the question of a draft I am all for it. Armed Forces made up of at least some non professionals might lessen the chances of our "leaders" acting foolishly. If the citizens don't want to fight perhaps we should be listening to them instead of our leaders.
John and Beth,
I agree 100% on the draft ... we need it now more than ever. Those that insinuate that a draft would bring about lower standards are deliberately deceiving you. WWII, Korea and Vietnam (along with the peacetime '47-'64 Army) were fought with a draftee/volunteer force that recieived identical training and indoctrination. Surprise, surprise, the draftees had lower rates of AWOL/desertion than the volunteers. It is interesting to note that in 1964, the last year of the peacetime draft, 17% of new enlistees/draftees had at least 60 college credits. In 2003, that percentage was only 9%. What's most interesting is that the proportion of Americans ages 18-24 attending college has increased 2.5 times since 1964.
A draft (or at least enlistment options targeted to a broader swath of our society) would bring to bear the full range of talents found in America's youth: language, physical prowess and intelligence. There would be no 39 year old E-1s, felony waivers or single E-1 moms in a drafted force. All three of these species are present in the vaunted "all-volunteer" force of today.
I would suggest Frank Shaeffer's excellent new book : "AWOL" that discusses the implications of the civil-military divide in greater detail.
DJ Elliot,
A few clarifications to your assertions:
1)Draftees in combat refusing to fight? Please. Fully 1/2 of the combat forces at Dak To, the Ia Drang Valley and Hamburger Hill were draftees. Many never lived to tell their tale. Others earned the CMoH, DSC and Purple Heart. How dare you insinuate that trained American fighting men that served our nation proudly "refused to fight." Sorry guy, but I'll take a drafted E-2 from a solid family, with good HS/college` grades and physical fitness any day over a 31 year old single mother that "volunteered" or a down-on-his-luck 36 year old private. Perhaps you should recognize that 19% of the Army's enlistees were category IV. Spare me the hoary tales about our "great" volunteer force.
2)There is ZERO comparison between the US draftee experience/current legislation and the countries you cite as abolishing the draft. Germany, the Netherlands, France etc. had/maintain two-tiered militaries where draftees were treated differently than regulars (e.g. Bundeswehr policy of not deploying conscripts to A'stan.) The US never maintained and does not maintain a two-tiered syestem. In 1966, '69 or 2008, draftee and volunteer enlisted personnel receive/ed identical IET training. By leaving out such pesky facts, your erroneous assumptions carry more weight than they should.
Clarification....
19% of the Army's enlistees in NOVEMBER 2005 were category IV.
Some time ago I asked my Marine Corps son what he thought of a draft. "Great idea!" said he. "You want to serve with draftees?" said I somewhat incredulous. "Absolutely! They'd be great for clearing mine fields and IEDs."
IRR:
These single moms, forty year-olds, and category IVs have done something most Americans never do: serve their country. Not all are gung-ho infantry types, but serve in other critical roles. They have also done other things their civilian counterparts have not done: cared for their families, turned their lives around, made something of themselves. What makes you think draftees, as a cross section of our society, will not include the same types you deem 'undesirable'?
Get off you high horse, it just makes you seem like an asshole.
Mike,
That's why we don't have E-3s or O-1s making national policy decisions. They often aren't armed with the facts.
You should educate your son about USMC draftees. They fought proudly, served with distiction and earned their globe and anchor at Parris Island and MCRD San Diego alongside volunteers.
My Dad was drafted into the Army in January 1969. He still recalls what happened at the Whitehall St. Induction Center in lower Manhattan. The folks reporting induction were formed into ranks and an NCO walked through counting off: "1, 2, 3, MARINE and so on down the line. Are these vets, 37 years later, lesser Marines for having been drafted? Are their medals for valor any less special? Are the names etched on a black wall in Washington, any less dead?
Neither you nor your son should be so flippant about our nation's military heritage or the gravity of our current personnel situation.
LJD,
Let's see ... for starters, the current Selective Service laws don't involve the drafting of women or men over the age of 26. So, right off the bat, several undesirable demographics won't be inducted.
2) The military is not a social-welfare "second chance" program to "turn lives around." Any such benefits are secondary to the primary military mission. I can't believe I'm having to lecture conservatives on this point.
3) The numbers are damning for certain demographics of volunteers concerning first termj attrition (ie. failing to complete an enlistment). In 2002, newarly 40% of Army enlistees didn't make it to scheduled discharge and this number approached nearly 60% for white women. Females have a much higher first term attrition rate. As do GED holders and older men (over age 30 at time of enlistment).
Who gets drafted, relies on two things: Selective Service laws and individual military regulations. If the Army only says it wants 18-24 year old men with 50 or better on the ASAVAB, that's what it inducts. A draft provides a wider pool to leverage all of our nations talent. Assuming that the small % of Americans we can get to currently volunteer is the optimal enlistment pool is delusional.
The "long war" will require a lot more talent than just what we can find with signing bonuses, medical insurance and other incentives.
This is one of the few times I actually agree with IRR... ;o)
Just because you're drafted doesn't necessarily mean you will be accepted and inducted. There were a lot of folks who were disqualified for service. I think the biggest failure of the draft in Vietnam (and what sticks in most folks' craws) is the way deferrments were handed out. If you can make it fair across the board with who gets accepted and who doesn't, I think there will be a lot less flak then most anticipate.
Draft - no thanks. I don't want conscripts. We don't need conscripts. The draft would be to, as an earlier commenter said:
"Armed Forces made up of at least some non professionals might lessen the chances of our "leaders" acting foolishly. If the citizens don't want to fight perhaps we should be listening to them instead of our leaders."
So the idea is lets bring in non-professionals that won't want to fight so the military won't get used. How about simply getting people that hold your position elected to Congress or the Presidency?
Well it doesn't surprise me that you totally missed my point IRR. Let me be blunt.
There are soldiers that enlisted beyond 18 years old, with broken families, and from questionable backgrounds, that DO THEIR JOBS AND FULFILL THE MISSION every damn day. In fact, many are the model soldier, advancing in grade and proficiency faster than their younger counterparts. Why, you ask? Because they have been on the other side, and have had the life experiences that drive them to succeed.
Frankly, your willingness to diminish their value is a huge slap in the face, and unbecoming of an officer. Maybe some day one of these old soldiers will be saving your ass.
Let me add, that I think you suffer from the same malady as the MSM in general: You can't seem to find a way to criticize a policy without pissing on the shoes of those doing the job.