 |  |
 
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! November 18, 2008 WinterBy GreyhawkSome very predictable (and unfortunate) reactions to military victory in Iraq. Imagine the surprise so many of these people would feel if they discovered the war was won a year ago. I don't think we need to worry about that, however - most of these folks think of war as 'something fought in Washington, D.C.' and strategy as planning for the battles fought every other year in November. Their 'war' can never end, and they'll have a difficult time understanding actual wars that inevitably do. Demonstrably, when one does they merely incorporate an argument on that point into their ongoing "battles". Here we look at war as armed conflict between opposing forces, and do our best to keep people informed about what's going on in the wars in which the United States is involved. But we keep an eye on Washington, too, as decisions made there can have obvious impact on the actual war. Their words and deeds can simplify and complicate the life or death tasks with which we are confronted. This is the ideal; politicians engaged and aware of the issues they debate, hopefully achieving a consensus that meets the needs of the republic and reflects the will of a majority of informed Americans. But over the past two years the ideal approached the absurd as the reality gap between the war in Washington and the actual war in Iraq widened and Americans were informed by media with standing armies in Washington completely overwhelming a small corps of reporters in Iraq. In this series we'll examine that "war in Washington" and the widening of that gap, in hopes of explaining to at least a few members of that public exactly why a war was won without their knowledge or consent. This is how it began. Winter
Weeks later, the Senate would review the nomination of David Petraeus for promotion to General and appointment as commander, Multi-National Force - Iraq. When questioned directly, Petraeus said he would not be able to do his job as commander of MNFI without the additional 21,000 troops President Bush has pledged to Iraq. Deploying these additional forces will make it difficult to increase time between deployments for troops who have already been burdened by the war on terror, he said, but plans are under way to sustain increased force levels. He offered an honest assessment of a difficult task, predicted a lengthy struggle (something the next day's "dire" headlines would emphasize) but assured those who were listening that success was achievable. "Hard is not hopeless," Petraeus informed the Senate, "and if confirmed, I pledge to do my utmost to lead our wonderful men and women in uniform and those of our coalition partners in Iraq as we endeavor to help the Iraqis make the most of the opportunity our soldiers, sailor, airmen and Marines have given to them." When given questions, the General answered them - perhaps even daring to say things the Senators would rather not hear. One of those most concerned by the General's willingness to offer a frank assessment to the Senate was Virginia Republican John Warner: Petraeus was unanimously confirmed: WASHINGTON, Jan. 26, 2007 - The Senate today confirmed Army Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus for promotion to general and assignment as commander of Multinational Force Iraq. ...and was sent to Iraq with the certain knowledge that political parties in the United States would not allow his war to intrude on theirs. Next: Part two - Spring
Posted by Greyhawk / November 18, 2008 11:52 AM | Permalink 11 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 |
Is it true that there's a provision allowing iraqi prosecution of U.S. soldiers when off duty or off base? What is this sh*t. Who allowed that to happen, and who's going to make sure it goes away?
I've already heard from two moms and one spouse who are livid about this. Define "off-base". Define "off-duty". What about shootings or attacks that occur on-base, say, from a civilian AQ or someone in in Iraqi security forces working with the U.S. that results in a shooting? There are troubling grey areas that are subject to all kinds of interpretations. Do we now have to clamor to pull everyone out starting in December for fear that our family members might be subject to the Iraqi judicial system? We already know AQ plots attacks to draw U.S. fire onto civilians. How many scenarios are there that this provision could be construed to cover? Unless there's something there that's not being announced, this is a sell-out.
Instead of running against Bush, which only made the remaining contrasts with Obama seem trivial, McCain should have run against the Democrats with this type of message.
Wonderful post. Unfortunately a history that will be soon forgotten if it hasn't been already.
This is a good idea.
However, don't worry about people not knowing that the war is won. In about 6 months, President O will declare that the war has been won, and the suck-up media will praise him for his extraordinary ability in turning the tide from defeat to victory.
Although the media will not be able to explain exactly what The One did to make victory happen, they will assure us that it was him, and not Bush, who won the war.
Date when the Iraq War is Officially Won:
January 23, 2009
Good work, GreyHawk. Keep it up and get it all down in as few pieces as possible. I need the full timeline and history to teach my kids what Liars look like.
Subsunk
The war was won, May 1st 2003. I think we all saw the damn banner behind the President as he made his victory speech.
I remember, because that's the day we rode over the berm from Kuwait and filed into Iraq behind the 3rd Infantry Division.
When the goal is a tangible one, you can have a tangible victory. Remove Saddam. Saddam removed, job done.
I don't know when it happened, when the mission changed from Saddam and those WMD's to acting as Iraq's unofficial national guard, but the current mission of bringing peace and stability isn't attainable. Maybe for the Iraqis, but not for us. It hurts to see our countries most precious resource squandered the way it has been and the way it continues to be. Until the conflict is over, not 'won'.
Good work, Greyhawk. I think the last 2 years of the Iraq war ahve made the American public trust the brass a lot more, and the pundits at well-funded thinktanks a lot less. It's remarkable the predictions some of these Washington-insiders made. That Sadr was the dominant political leader in Iraq, that the Sahwa movement would touch off a large-scale civil war, that Al-Qaeda in Iraq didn't exist and was a propaganda tool by the Bush administration, that the U.S. was trying to start a war with Iran, etc. It hasn't done much for their credibility...you people know who you are.
Even though I am an American civilian with no military experience I find Greyhawk's account squares with my own experience of the events described. Congress struck me at the time as foolishly certain that Iraq was unwinnable. Most of them fell all over themselves to condemn the war and then all voted to confirm Petraeus - apparently certain he would fail. It was obvious they hadn't been reading this blog or Roggio or Yon. It had been clear since mid 2006 that something was happening in Anbar in general and Ramadi in particular. I wondered at the time, don't these guys have access to intelligence us civilians lack? With such unanimous confidence in defeat, I thought perhaps the intelligence community was predicting defeat too! If so, how fortunate the President was reading blogs instead of listening to the CIA.
it IS unwinnable. The current objective is an abstract idea: peace and security. Turn on the news at night, how peaceful and secure are we here even in the states? These are ideas or concepts we're chasing. Who's to say when it's secure enough or peaceful enough to say we've "won". Even then, it's not our country, so would the correct statement be "Iraq has won"?
Never mind that the current objective has nothing to do with why we are there in the first place. Freedom is something that must be earned, it can't be given and certainly not at gunpoint.
I haven't spent the war watching the news or listening to pundits, I spent two and a half years there fighting it. So I guess what do I know?
It's pretty hard for the MSM to make a lot of noise about the US winning when they spent the last 5 yrs cheering for the other side.