
![]() | |
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! April 28, 2007 Appeal for More HypeBy GreyhawkChap asks, "Funnily enough I don't see anything about information war in the good LTCOL's article. Where's the IW/PA/PSYOPS love?" Heh. I suspect that like me, Chap sees it between every line of the subsequent coverage. But perhaps I'm simply transferring my own suspicions... Wow - here's a huge surprise. NPR did a story this week on military members "speaking out". Members of the U.S. armed forces are prohibited from speaking out against the war in Iraq. The Uniform Code of Military Justice limits what soldiers may say about political issues.Whoever wrote that line has never read the "letters to the editor" section of the Army Times. That last claim is a load of horseshit, and reveals more about the purpose of NPR's story than its (uninformed) author probably intended. But it's an effective appeal to the ignoratti - and it establishes the mindset they want listeners to bring to the remainder of the piece. Later the guy confesses to war crimes - indiscriminately shooting civilians. This actually would land him in military prison, but the author of this one would prefer you to believe it's his courageous speech that would end his freedom. Anyhow, Several months later, he was back in the United States and signed a petition calling for a withdrawal from Iraq. It's known as the Appeal for Redress, and all of the signatories are active-duty servicemen and servicewomen.Listen to the NPR audio and you can even hear Jonathan Hutto "rail against the imperialist war against the working class". Yup - it's yet another free advertisement for the Astroturf campaign. You have to admit that Fenton Communications really knows their business - the PR campaign for this "grass roots" movement has been highly effective in getting attention for the front group (and hiding those behind it). And given the time and resources of those various groups behind it (and despite Hutto's exaggerations) a miserable failure at collecting signatures. (If signatures are their purpose, that is, the failure doesn't seem to have dampened the media enthusiasm thus far.) An actual un-hyped, grass roots counter-effort, Appeal for Courage, has drawn more in just two months without any organized publicity campaign. One wonders if that's sparked a sense of urgency among the faithful... But lo and behold - at the same NPR link above: Lt. Col. Paul Yingling is an active duty commander of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment. Friday, he published an article in Armed Forces Journal entitled "General Failure." It charges Army generals with incompetent leadership of the Iraq war.Gannett is certainly doing a fine job of pimping this glorified letter to the editor, too. At least the NPR piece does clarify a few of Yingling's more vague original points. Responding to comments that the military is adapting to a fluid battlefield, Lt Col Yingling demonstrates a vice-like grasp of the obvious: The Armed forces are trying to get better at counterinsurgency. But the measure of effectiveness - we will know we're succeeding when Iraqi civilians become safer. Until that happens we can't describe our efforts as successful.In short, it's only after a strategy has been executed and concluded that we can determine its worth. When asked if there are any Generals who meet his personal approval as leaders for the future he named Shinseki. Say what you will of Lt Col Yingling, he has the most amazingly crystal clear hindsight I've ever seen. I see three distinct points of discussion on Lt Col Yingling's article and the suspiciously large and simultaneous amount of subsequent coverage it's gotten beyond the Gannet publication in which it first appeared. 1. The points he makes in the body of the piece. Though much more valid prior to the change in strategy in Iraq they remain well worthy of discussion. Lex addressed them here. (Please read.) 2. Yingling's conclusion - congress must take more control over America's Generals. I find this disturbing, as congress is and has been very much involved in the process (recall the unanimous approval of General Petraeus as Commander, MNF-I for a recent example). Grim touched on that aspect here but I think that's just a start of a fine discussion. (Would more congressional control - exercised by Hillary Clinton and Trent Lott et al - over the past five years really have made a difference? Think about that...) 3. The subsequent coverage. I find the comments of my fellow MilBloggers (and hopefully my own input) quite worthwhile and exactly the sort of thoughtful, informed discussion one would hope would result from the original point. But the media hype - full of claims that prison awaits those who speak out, and conflation of Yingling's piece with the Appeal for Redress astroturf campaign (not just NPR, the AP did it here) - is unhelpful, and seems a bit too well timed with the "anti-war" crowd in congress' desperate need for some immediate means to discredit one specific American General. I don't believe that last aim is shared by Lt Col Yingling. And I believe he might be somewhat disturbed to find himself sharing the radio airwaves and newspaper text with the Appeal for Redress crowd. Beyond superficial similarities I think the only commonality between the two is an obviously well-oiled publicity campaign going on behind the scenes - in one case hiding the real story and in another hammering the square peg of truth into the pre-shaped round hole of current (and immediate) political expedience. One last trip back to NPR's advertisement for Appeal for Redress: The campaign is not without critics, including military bloggers...That's all you get by way of balance. But I have to suspect that if the author is actually aware of any milblogger critique of the group, they are fully aware of the nature of that complaint, and chose not to include it in the report. Since it would completely derail the point I suspect the Fenton folks would be a bit upset if they did. Posted by Greyhawk / April 28, 2007 2:58 PM | Permalink 1 TrackBackA short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention. This is the Weekend Edition of the Web Reconnaissance it is updated periodically throughout the weekend as time and family permits. Read More 6 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 |
I read LTC Yingling's article and was reminded of what Ralph Peters wrote at a much earlier time (end of the Cold War, I think) and what others wrote during the ascendancy of SOCOM during the '80's. In short, there are always those who are not in the corridors of power who are willing to criticize those that are. Not that anything the good LTC wrote is necessarily incorrect, but it has been said before. And much better by Ralph Peters.
I personally think that our GO ranks are over-politicized and emasculated by rank and privilege, but the solution is NOT for 535 wannabe Commanders-if-Chief to get more involved. After all, only a very few of them ever wore a uniform and fewer care what the military thinks or needs.
I had a buddy email me that article yesterday and I spent most of this morning analyzing it. I'd say that I've got a little insight to the issue as I've spent the last 27 years either in or working for the Army...first as a cadet at Harvard on the Hudson to being a infantry platoon leader in the first "light" division at Fort Ord, California...an Intel puke following an ankle reconstruction then for the past 15 years or so a DA civilian. I see full colonels and general officers come and go...and the one thing that can be said for the breed, they're more alike than they are different.
Of all the points LTC Yingling made, I believe that his thoughts about conducting 360 degree appraisals of performance to be pretty spot on accurate. For those of you that might not know, a 360 evaluation takes inputs from not only superiors, but also peers and subordinates. While you may be able to fool the boss by having "perfect" Kodak moments in front of him...you'll rarely be able to keep from showing your butt to your buddies and the troops. I think 360 evals would be a huge plus!
One of the other "faults" I found with the piece had to do with the "praise" of those leaders who decided to come forward AFTER hanging up the uniform. They served in the same Army, same time period as those they choose to throw rocks at. Actually, they raised the current crop of GOs from pup colonels. Let's not be so fast to throw your protégés under the bus, boys. I'm certainly not going to puff up my chest with pride because you found your voices and your balls after hanging up the suit. Not tremendously brave of you...but those couple extra stars you were able to slap on your collars. Were they worth it gentlemen?
LTC Yingling also seems to be very much enamored by the fact that he and other "movers and shakers" have graduate degrees and might be able to pop out a few words of Espanol. While I agree that an officer, especially a senior one, should be well read and fast on his feet with brainpower...I've met too many dumbasses holding PhDs to have much respect. True, they've shown a degree of "stick-to-it-tiveness" to complete an academic program, but if you don't have the common sense God gives most good leaders and managers, even Harvard ain't going to help. We've had the Thayer model of education "in play" at West Point since the early 1800's. It does emphasize the "whole man" concept. While it used to be pretty engineering heavy, over the years things appear to be balancing out between hard and soft sciences as well as English, Foreign Languages (always been there) and History of all sorts of flavors. I've never felt at a disadvantage in a conversation with anyone holding more sheepskin than me...and I thank the great American people that helped put me through the "joint."
In any case, I'd read that article if I were you with a few grains of salt at the ready. LTC Yingling made some valid observations, but I'm not sure he got it completely right. He certainly has the attention of some of the Army's most senior leaders...and rightfully so. Generals are definitely perpetuating the problems Yingling brings up. It's time to figure out how to change things and do it as quickly as possible.
See you on the high ground...
MajorDad1984
To show the difference between the two appeals for redress more closely, consider the appeal for redress website, where you can make an online donation for up to $5000 with just a click of the mouse. At the Appeal For Courage we've had several offers for donations, all politely turned down because we have nothing that needs paying for, other than the website fees. We instead ask that the money be donated to charities that help soldiers and their families.
Too many generals kept their own opinions quit for too many reasons , some good and some bad. More should of told the politicians that they were fools for invading Iraq but they didn't.
The Democrats are much more heavily represented in Congress as vetrans than the Republicans, contrary to most public opinion.http://www.awolbush.com/whoserved.html
JohnRyan, I tried to get through the page you linked to support your claim that Democrats are more heavily represented, but I couldn't.
Do you have a link that might be more interested in presenting facts, and less in skewing facts in order to be a political hit piece?
He's mistaken.
http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/RS21379.pdf