 |  |
 
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! September 8, 2007 Supporting the Troops? UPDATEDBy GreyhawkAhem... In the July 16 report, two soldiers with the 2nd Infantry division, Corporal Joshua Lake and Specialist Michael Vassell, spoke candidly about their experiences in Iraq.That position has been noted: It would benefit you to listen to the poignant messages of your soldiers in Iraq, who are paying -- with their blood, nerves and scattered limbs -- the price for these sorts of irresponsible statements. Among them is the eloquent message of Joshua which he sent by way of the media, in which he wipes the tears from his eyes and describes American politicians in harsh terms and invites them to join him there for a few days. Perhaps the message will find in you an attentive ear so you can rescue him and more than 150,000 of your sons there who are tasting the two bitterest things:So who said it? Nancy Pelosi? Harry Reid? Jon Soltz? Nope, Osama bin Laden. Sucks to be you, Joshua. Update: Clarification from Newsbusters: "Specialist Michael Vassell, not Corporal Joshua Lake, made the comment cited by bin Laden." Still sucks to be Joshua. In fact, it sucks even worse - one of America's greatest enemies in history quotes his pal and pins it on him. Spc Vassell is African-American, which helps explain the remainder of bin Laden's comments regarding service in Iraq: It is severer than what the slaves used to suffer at your hands centuries ago, and it is as if some of them have gone from one slavery to another slavery more severe and harmful, even if it be in the fancy dress of the Defense Department's financial enticements.Osama's inspiration for that bit was Charlie Rangell (D-NY): [Rangell] called the war “morally wrong” and said “it goes even beyond the brutality of slavery and the lynchings.” Seriously, a copy of this one needs to go to every GI in Iraq. By the way, Osama's been pretty consistent over the years. 1996: Where was this false courage of yours when the explosion in Beirut took place on 1983 AD (1403 A.H). You were turned into scattered pits and pieces at that time; 241 mainly marines solders were killed. And where was this courage of yours when two explosions made you to leave Aden in lees than twenty four hours!1998: John Miller, ABC: Describe the situation when your men took down the American forces in Somalia.
Posted by Greyhawk / September 8, 2007 7:58 PM | Permalink 17 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 |
Yeah, I was thinking the same, . . . sucks to be Josh right now.
He's trying to tell his buddies, "No man, I wasn't actually crying, I was just, well, you know, . . . I'm just sayin' . . . "
I'm not seeing the point of this...there's plenty of soldiers who've made similar comments for legitimate reasons? Are they supposed to keep their mouths shut in case some guy in a cave might reference their words? Obviously, if I was Joshua I would be annoyed that of all people in the world, Osama Bin Laden decides to reference me, but if the flipside you never open your mouth and utter a true opinion, than Bin Laden pretty much already won anyway.
Maybe I'm misintepreting the post, but "sucks to be you," written about a combat veteran seems a little flippant and juvenile, but I'm reading into it wrong, then that's my bad.
We're all about free speech here.
And the consequences thereof.
What you're seeing is somebody publicly complaining about the difficulty of their mission and suggesting that they can't hack it. That might have been a statement made at an emotional moment, or a carefully thought out position - I don't know which. But obviously it sent an encouraging message loud and clear to the very top of the organization of guys who are trying to kill him and his brothers in arms.
I'm guessing you're a civilian and not in Iraq - if you were a soldier over here you'd know exactly what the phrase meant. When you're at war and your enemy shares, endorses, and encourages your opinion and broadcasts that message around the world - and when most of the guys there with you don't share your weakness - then it sucks to be you.
Funny that you say that...I got back from Iraq three weeks ago after a monthlong embed with the 82nd - my second trip. Everybody there complained every minute of the day - and they hacked it, every minute of the day.
There are a million pantywaists in this country for you to target anger and blame at, when it comes to Bin Laden's bleatings...No soldier needs more piling on, in what is clearly an embarrasing moment for him.
I agree we all face the consequences of our free speech. If you start picking your battles with junior enlisted soldiers in a combat zone, then I simply question how productively you're using yours.
Nathan:
Bin ladeen did the piling on.
I'm not calling on people to lynch the guy, just pointing out it sucks to be him. You're reading far far too much into the post.
Another point on GI speak: soldiers don't complain. (This is an insider's reference too. Ask someone else to explain this one to you.)
Nobody's saying they shouldn't speak their minds, or even dissent from the policies they're charged with carrying out, but modern war's most critical battlespace is the media, and that of public perception.
What soldiers say and think is important. Their words, if parroted by the media or enemy, can translate into tangible losses, and can really do damage. That's not to say they should be silenced, but simply that they should be wary when reporters are around, and judicious with their words.
Also, the daily complaining in the ranks could strike a reporter or the enemy the wrong way, if they haven't been exposed to that culture. They're not going to casually interpret it as "a griping grunt is a happy grunt." They'll put those words front and center as proof positive that everything is hopeless.
Simply saying all soldiers, officers and enlisted, should weigh their words if they're talking to the media isn't a horrible thing, but in this day and age it's just another part of the fight.
What Jordan said ...
... in this day and age, a soldier has to be as aware of where his mouth is pointing, as he is of where his weapon is pointing.
I'm actually an Army war veteran as well. Soldiers 'complain' all day about everything under and including the sun. If you want to use a different word for it, fine, but let's not go all "culture war" here.
Like I said originally, if I misread the post, fine, that's my mistake. But as far as I can tell, Bin Laden clearly and deliberately chose an example he probably knew would get the desired result from both sides:
The left will rally around it as an example of poor, helpless, bedraggled troops barely able to fight this unfair war. Which is a dirty lie. The kid goes out there, fighting for all of us, and he's 10 times the man any anti-war limo liberal is.
The right will attack the soldier, and say how he's not representative of the rest, and it's terrible and he's letting his buddies down. Which is equally untrue. He really is pretty representative, and he just had the brass balls to say what all his friends were probably thinking.
If people sitting on their fat asses back in the U.S. can't intepret and understand a soldier's war zone words for the emotional venting that they are, that's not the soldier's fault - that's our fault for being stupid and lazy and not bothering to understand men at war. Read "Here Is Your War" by Ernie Pyle sometime, and you'll get all the complaining you can handle.
Bin Laden is a sissy bitch sitting in a cave, and yet his words make us dance like puppets all the same, and divide us even against the soldiers we've sent to fight the war against him.
Bingo, which is also why it sucks to be him - you don't want to be 'that guy'. The phrase would apply equally to someone who stumbles into a binjo ditch on a dark night in Korea, or who by luck of the draw gets to be monitor for a piss test three times in a row. It essentially conveys the same message as "Gosh I wouldn't want to be in your shoes" but also conveys a bit of empathy for the situation - at least as much as you're likely to see acknowledged by your fellow troops, who are (of course) tough guys all.
By the way, Nate's reports from Iraq are quite good.
If I've understood this discussion correctly Nate, the argument that you've built up into a crusade is about one individual who is being used for propaganda by the other side, somewhat in the same manner as Hanoi Jane was used in 'Nam. The fact that the young man made his job harder in addition to giving the members of congress who are against the war ammo to use against him is nothing short of obstreporous.
That you're arguing his case shows that you weren't in the war that showed how bad it could be. That you come into this thread and start slinging around slights such 'people sitting on their fat asses' at people who have a myriad of years beyond you in terms of experience, both of combat and of peacetime, causes one to wonder what your 'Army war' experience is. One normally couches his terms as 'Nam vet or Iraqi vet or Kuwaiti vet. How are you identified?
Greyhawk-
You are right "It sucks to be him." I mean how freakin embarrassing would it be in World War II if Tokyo Rose quoted you "bitchin" about being in the war. Hell, at the very least back in World War II over 10 million men were drafted you'd expect some soldiers might "bitch". Which makes today's volunteer soldier "bitch" moments even all the more important to Al Queda and the other Jihadists. I don't know if that frustration comes from the fact that over 90% of the population can't comprehend what our servicemen and women have to put up with. Or that the leadership of one political party would rather hamstring our military with laywers instead doing what it takes to win this war.
It essentially conveys the same message as "Gosh I wouldn't want to be in your shoes" but also conveys a bit of empathy for the situation - at least as much as you're likely to see acknowledged by your fellow troops, who are (of course) tough guys all.
If that's the way I should have intepreted it from the very beginning, then like I said from the start, that's my mistake and I've overreacted. To me, it just seemed like an unneccessary attack on some poor troop, but if that's not how it was intended, then I took it much more seriously than you meant. But he's not here to defend himself, so I figured I'd do it for him.
Any soldier in a combat zone can clearly complain about another soldier who screws up like this...but by posting about him and his words, it holds him up to CIVILIAN ridicule, and to those who would use his bad luck against him, for their own political purposes. That was obviously Bin Laden's intention.
Bottom line is I feel bad for the kid and I think he should just be left out of it (especially since he was misquoted no less).
The article you linked to is my least favorite, because it's all about me, and not the soldiers I was actually there to interview...I'm annoyed there's even an online link to it.
Hey, Mike H., I don't need to justify myself or my service to you or anybody. Read the posts. I didn't come in here throwing my weight around. All I did was clarify my bonafides when they were questioned, in defense of a fellow veteran.
Bin Laden's mesage isn't aimed at Americans - it's a recruiting drive for al Qaeda aimed at Muslims. See the 1996 and 1998 versions. Americans shouldn't be duped into thinking he's talkng to them at all.
Nate,
Please put some links in comments to some of your preferred articles. I really did like that first one, though I understand what you're saying though abv.
One thing about written comunication - unless the sender and receiver know each other well it's easy to make fundamental misjudgments regarding intent - we rely more on inflection, tone, and body language in communications than we consciously recognize.
The poor troop is fighting toe to toe with the most demonic terrorists on the planet. He can probably withstand a little ribbing from his own uniformed brethren. He's not a helpless victim, he's just an American fighting man who happened to talk within earshot of a reporter.
Of course WE can keep it in proper perspective, and take it for what it is. THEY will use the words to do further damage to the public perceptions about the war, arguably the most important theater in this war. And they certainly have. It's not so much an attack on this soldier, but a cautionary tale for all of them.
Yeah, I went a little overboard...ah, what are you gonna do...that's the Internet for you.
The biggest part of the reason I was so strident is having just got back from a month at a JSS in Bayji (this was no FOB. It got mortared consistently, and random gunfire was a constant. It was not the worst place by far, but it wasn't the best, though getting better), I can say that what Lake and Vassell said were very representative of the many junior enlisted soldiers I talked to...it wasn't 50-50...more like 90-10. And bear in mind, this was the 82nd!
Having said that, there is no single complaint ever uttered on a patrol or any mission - not one. No matter how hot it gets, or pointless they think it is. That's what counts, not the words somebody decides to misuse.
So when I see a soldier get "attacked" (which wasn't actually the case here), it reminds me of those guys and it reminds me how unfair it would be if the same thing happened to one of them.
When I got back, people would say "oh they must have tried to spin you!" And I'm like "Spin me? I tried to spin them!" Because, since I got sit in on meetings with shiekhs, etc., I could see the local Sunni leadership is buying into the reconcilation concept. But, when you're an E-4 pulling security on a rooftop in 130 degrees, you do NOT see that, and you don't care. More than once, someone would be venting to me, and I would have to tell THEM, "yeah, but the Sunnis are coming around," and then they'd say "yeah, you're probably right. I guess it's working."
It's their story and they get to describe it the way they want....I really believe it's up to America to appreciate those words for the truth they are, not blame a soldier or use the words to excuse our own lack of resolve. Which I don't think anyone here is really doing.
Like everyone agrees, anyone "in the family" can give this guy a hard time - I mean, he got mentioned by Bin Laden for crying out loud. That doesn't happen to everybody.
But, if I'd read it right the first time, my first comment would have been much more tongue-in-cheek...And of course, once you called me out for being a "civilian not in the war zone," I naturally got defensive...civilian now, yes, but...haha...
I'm too lazy to post links, but they're around.