Dawn Patrol 02/03/2010
[Mrs Greyhawk]
Welcome to the Dawn Patrol, our daily roundup of information on the War on Terror and other topics - from the MilBlogs and various sources around the world. If you're a blogger, you can join the conversation. If you link to any of these stories, add a link to the Dawn Patrol too and your trackback will be added to the list. Hat Tips to the Dawn Patrol are greatly appreciated.Refresh for updates.
Support Our Troops, Read Their Stories
----------------------------
Pentagon Behind Obama Schedule for Deploying Troops to Afghanistan -- [FOX]
The Pentagon expects to deploy 18,000 of the 30,000 troops called up to Afghanistan by late spring, a slower pace than the White House envisioned, but necessary, say Pentagon officials, because President Obama did not want to shorten troops' rest time at home.
Mullen: Afghanistan success window small -- [Washington Times]
U.S. 'imperiled' if war not won, Joint Chiefs chairman warns
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said Tuesday the next 12 to 18 months will be critical in reversing momentum gained by insurgents in Afghanistan, with nothing short of the war-torn nation's security at stake.
Not only that, Adm. Mike Mullen told the Senate Armed Services Committee: "Our future security is greatly imperiled if we do not win the wars we are in."
US Marines facing a 'different war' in Afghanistan -- [AFP]
For the US Marines deployed to the battlefields of southern Afghanistan, life is fragile and thoughts focus on the day they see their families again, but something about this war is different. They are preparing for an offensive on Marjah, one of the Taliban's big urban strongholds in the southern province of Helmand, but progress is slow with the militants apparently preferring fight to flight.
The Marines will soon be joined by tens of thousands more soldiers, the lion's share of the 30,000-strong troop surge promised by US President Barack Obama in December to try and turn around the grinding Afghan war.
Predators pound terrorist camp in North Waziristan -- [Long War Journal - Bill Roggio]
A swarm of unmanned US aircraft pounded an al Qaeda camp today in the Taliban-controlled tribal agency of North Waziristan.
Five unmanned US strike aircraft, likely the Predators and Reapers, are reported to have fired 18 missiles at a camp and vehicles in the village of Datta Khel, a known al Qaeda and Taliban stronghold. This is the largest recorded US airstrike in Pakistan, indicating a top al Qaeda, Taliban, or Haqqani Network leader, or leaders, may have been present.
Eyes in the Sky -- [Army Live]
Being a Soldier in the United States Army is a full-time job. No one understands that more than the Soldiers assigned to the 3rd Heavy Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division's unmanned aerial vehicle cell. Twenty-four hours a day they monitor the 3rd HBCT's area of operation from above. "We are always on the lookout for the bad guys," said Staff Sgt. Ray Lemlin, a platoon sergeant in Company A, Brigade Special Troops Battalion. "The goal is always to spot them before they can hurt us."
Revenge on the Taliban, from 10,000 feet -- [Washington Post]
In their joint operations against Taliban militants hiding in the tribal areas, the United States and Pakistan seem to have embraced a classic bit of battlefield advice: Don't get mad, get even.
...Although Pakistan publicly criticizes the drone attacks, the administration official stressed that the recent campaign "is being done in full concert and cooperation" with the Pakistani government. "We've been very pleased with the extent of the cooperation," the official said, adding that the so-called box of geographical coordinates within which the Pakistanis allow the Predators to operate was wide enough to allow attacks on targets that are "geographically dispersed."
Pakistan blast kills US soldiers (Video) -- [BBC]
Three US soldiers are among at least 10 people killed when a blast hit a convoy near a school in north-west Pakistan. Police said around 70 people, including 63 school girls and a US soldier, were injured in the bombing in Lower Dir.
The soldiers were believed to have been training Pakistan's Frontier Corps in counter-insurgency operations.
The two governments deny substantial numbers of US troops are based inside Pakistan, where public opinion is strongly opposed to their presence.
3 G.I.s Killed in Pakistan. Now Can We Start Treating This Like a Real War? -- [Danger Room - Noah Shachtman]
Last year, President Obama and his administration ruled out sending U.S. ground forces into Pakistan. Instead, the White House said, America's clandestine operations there would be waged solely by remote-control -- with Predator and Reaper drones. "There is a red line," said special envoy Richard Holbrooke. "And the red line is unambiguous and stated publicly by the Pakistani government over and over again: No foreign troops on our soil." Yet today, three U.S. soldiers were killed and two more were wounded
Never take it for granted -- [One Marine's View - in Afghanistan]
When we lose a warrior, a part of you goes with them....
...From the smiles of children walking down a street of a recently liberated village to the compassion of our young Marines that tend to those same children after recently slugging it out with the enemy, I often ask "Where do we get such men?" Such men that will sacrifice themselves to protect others they have never met? To demonstrate a nearly inconceivable wrath of weaponry onto the enemy and in a split second later help a young child or elderly man out of the street, sometimes even before the battle is over?
He is a Marine and willing to sacrifice everything to make something bad better off and make a difference. They will not be forgotten.
It's the Economy, Undergraduate -- [At War]
What do they think of all this back there, in your world?
I knew what answer he expected because of the surprise that registers on such soldiers' faces when I offer a different one. He expected that in my world of left-leaning professors and privileged students, the war he and his unit were waging would be viewed with scorn or disgust, and maybe that he and his profession would be, too.
That wasn't the case, I told him. From his expression, what I told him was worse: that in my world (if it really is my world, but that's another question) most students -- young people who are his peers, at least in terms of age and video games and music -- rarely spare his war more than a passing thought.
Around ANA Land -- -- [Afghanistan My Last Tour - in Afghanistan]
One of my stops today was the proposed site for the new library and literacy program. The ANA Garrison commander has designated some room space inside a large building to accommodate these programs. The current library is compressed into a small room and the shelves are sparsely stocked. There are 99 books for the entire library.
Dari Keyboard -- [Afghanistan My Last Tour - in Afghanistan]
For the past few days, I have been working studiously with my ANA counterpart on accountability. The tool I'm using is an Excel Spreadsheet. For anyone who has basic knowledge of computers and programs, this program is fairly easy to use once the formulas are created. Then it's just a matter of populating the data points. But for someone who only has a rudimentary knowledge of computers and a high school degree (Afghanistan level), it becomes rather challenging to explain basic algebra, formulas, etc. As such, I have finally made headway and when my counterpart does understand, it's like a bright light comes on in his head. For me, it's just another small victory in mentoring.
Taking Tea with the Taliban -- [Commentary Mag - Michael Rubin]
Addressing the nation on December 1, 2009, President Barack Obama laid out the case for an augmented American presence in Afghanistan to battle the Taliban forces seeking to push their way back into power. "Over the last several years, the Taliban has maintained common cause with al-Qaeda, as they both seek an overthrow of the Afghan government," he declared. The president offered a brief account of the Taliban's rise to power before the U.S. tossed them out in November 2001. "Al-Qaeda's base of operations was in Afghanistan," he said, "where they were harbored by the Taliban--a ruthless, repressive, and radical movement that seized control of that country after it was ravaged by years of Soviet occupation and civil war, and after the attention of America and our friends had turned elsewhere."
New Afghan police officers graduate -- [Helmand Blog]
The first class of Afghan police officers to attend a new training centre graduated in a ceremony in Helmand yesterday.
More than 130 recruits of the Interim Helmand Police Training Centre attended the event in the Lashkar Gah district. The centre was set up last month to help with the recruitment push for 160,000 police officers across Afghanistan by the end of this year. From March, the centre is expected to train 2550 students a year.
Helmand deputy governor Sattar Marzakwal told the graduates: "You have the responsibility of serving the Afghan people with dignity.
U.S. military officers could face punishment over ambush in Afghanistan -- [Washington Post]
A military investigation into an ambush that left nine Americans dead recommends that the Army consider taking disciplinary action against three U.S. commanders who oversaw the 2008 mission to send troops to the remote Afghan outpost, defense officials said Tuesday.
Afghans protest to Iran over border killings -- [Reuters]
Afghanistan protested on Tuesday against what it said was the killing of five of its nationals by Iranian border forces. Host to millions of Afghan refugees for decades, Iran is also a key transit route for Afghanistan's opium and heroin trade.
The incident happened on Monday when a group of seven Afghans were trying to enter Iran, an Afghan foreign ministry official said, adding all were teenage males.
Bomb kills 20 in Iraqi Shi'ite city of Kerbala -- [Reuters]
A bomb on a cart pulled by a motorcycle killed at least 20 in a crowd of Shi'ite pilgrims on Wednesday in Iraq's holy city of Kerbala where hundreds of thousands have gathered for a religious rite, police said.
Obama, Biden meet with Iraqi VP -- [AFP]
President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden met Monday with Iraq's Sunni Vice President, Tariq al-Hashimi, and discussed the importance
Iraq court lifts ban on hundreds of candidates -- [Atlanta Journal Constitution]
An Iraqi appeals court Wednesday struck down a ban imposed on hundreds of candidates for suspected ties to Saddam
Blair Called a Liar in Iraq Inquiry -- [NY Times]
Only days after Tony Blair offered an impassioned defense of his decision to take Britain to war in Iraq, a cabinet minister who resigned over the war delivered a blistering condemnation of the former prime minister on Tuesday, accusing him of "conning" her and of deceiving his cabinet, the Parliament and the public in his resolve to have Britain join the United States in the invasion of 2003.
Multiple Air Force crews, Landstuhl staff team up to save Peace Corps member injured in Kazakhstan -- [Soldiers' Angels Germany ]
What an amzing story. We all hear so many negative things that it's sometimes easy to forget how many wonderful, dedicated people there are in this world. And when multiple teams across Central Asia, Europe, and the US come together save a life, they can make miracles happen.
Iran hints at prisoner swap for 3 U.S. hikers -- [Washington Times]
President signals shift on uranium
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Tuesday proposed a swap of Iranians in U.S. prisons for three American hikers being held in Tehran.
In a television interview, Mr. Ahmadinejad also said Iran was ready to send its uranium abroad for further enrichment as requested by the United Nations, signaling a major shift in the Iranian position on the issue.
US Denies Speaking to Iran About Prisoner Swap -- [Voice of America]
The United States has denied speaking to Iran about a prisoner exchange after Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Tehran has held discussions about such a swap.
Ahmadinejad backs deal to remove bulk of enriched uranium from Iran -- [Washington Post]
A long-dormant proposal to remove the bulk of Iran's enriched uranium from the Islamic republic appeared to be revived Tuesday as President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Iran had "no problem" with a deal initially brokered by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The deal, which Iran formally rejected weeks ago, would swap low-enriched uranium for fuel for a research reactor that produces medical isotopes. "If we allow them to take it, there is no problem,"
US wary as Iran president agrees nuclear deal terms -- [BBC]
The US has reacted warily after Iran appeared to accept a deal to swap enriched uranium for nuclear fuel.
Emergency Assistance Still Hasn't Reached Many Haitians -- [Washington Post]
Three weeks after a powerful earthquake destroyed Haiti's capital, aid officials are still seeking to reach hundreds of thousands of desperate people who apparently have not received food and shelter from an expanding international aid operation, U.S. officials said Tuesday.
China's threat to sanction US firms in arms sale could backfire -- [Los Angeles Times]
In Washington, a White House spokesman said it would "not be warranted" for China to slap sanctions on the US companies over the Obama administration's
Corrected: Obama to meet Dalai Lama despite Chinese warnings -- [Reuters]
He offered no details on how China would impose sanctions. Companies that could be affected by Chinese sanctions include Sikorsky Aircraft Corp,
Panetta: Terror Attack in US Likely Soon -- [Military.com/AP]
Al-Qaida can be expected to attempt an attack on the United States in the next three to six months, senior U.S. intelligence officials told Congress.
The terrorist organization is deploying operatives to the United States to carry out new attacks from inside the country, including "clean" recruits with a negligible trail of terrorist contacts, CIA Director Leon Panetta said. The chilling warning comes as Christmas airline attack suspect, Nigerian Umar Farouk Abdulmutullab, is cooperating with federal investigators, a federal law enforcement official said Tuesday.
Would-be LAX terrorist's prison sentence overturned as too lenient -- [Los Angeles Times]
A divided appeals panel rules that the 22-year sentence for an Al Qaeda operative didn't follow guidelines. He had originally agreed to cooperate with authorities for a lighter sentence but reneged.
Bill Would Forbid Civilian 9/11 Trials -- [Military.com/Atlanta Journal-Constitution]
Saying America can't afford the costs or the threat to national security, U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) and a bipartisan group of other senators introduced legislation Tuesday that would forbid public funding for a civilian trial of those accused of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
Instead, the senators want the government to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, alleged to be the Sept. 11 mastermind, and other terror suspects in a military courtroom at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
DOJ's New Tool Against Criticism: New Media -- [FOX]
Facing mounting pressure from both Democrats and Republicans over its handling of recent terrorism cases, the Justice Department is taking unprecedented steps to push back against critics.
Last night the Justice Department unveiled an entire web page -- titled "The Criminal Justice System as a Counterterrorism Tool" -- to address the growing debate.
One DOJ official described the new web page as an effort "to get the facts out there" and show that "the policy for handling these terrorism cases has not changed" from the way previous administrations handled such cases.
Brennan: All Transferred Detainees Who Returned to Terrorism Were Released by Bush, No Recidivism for Those Released by Obama -- [ABC News]
n a letter to congressional leaders sent Monday night, White House adviser John Brennan, the assistant to President Obama for homeland security and counterterrorism, argued that President Obama had made "significant improvements to the detainee review process" under President Bush and pointed out that all the former detainees released or transferred who have returned to terrorist activities were released or transferred under President Bush.
Is there an adult in there somewhere? Bueller? Bueller? -- [The Armorer]
It sure doesn't look like it.CNN's Steve Brusk tweets: "Law enforcement source says AbdulMutallah has been providing useful, current, and actionable intelligence. Leads being actively chased."Heh. This is smoke and mirrors, pure and simple.Let's take it at face value.It's been a month since AbdulMutallah proved himself an inept murderer-by-suicide. Hell, he's not even as successful as Achmed the Dead Terrorist.
MI5 hunting breast implants of death -- [WND]
Authorities alarmed by possibility of surgically placed bombs
Agents for Britain's MI5 intelligence service have discovered that Muslim doctors trained at some of Britain's leading teaching hospitals have returned to their own countries to fit surgical implants filled with explosives, according to a report from Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin. Women suicide bombers recruited by al-Qaida are known to have had the explosives inserted in their breasts under techniques similar to breast enhancing surgery.
Impact of deployment on kids -- negative reporting and troop bashing hurts them too -- [You Served]
I highlighted the area in bold text below that needs a LOT of attention brought to the matter. Negative reporting on the war, and the lack of support of the war and our troops affects the morale of everyone -- including our military children. I am so sick and tired of the BS line "we support our troops but not the war." It's not true. It's contradictory and this report here shows how that very attitude is not only unsupportive, but it is outright harmful to the children of our deployed troops.
I am going to print out a copy of the actual report and will write up some more.
Interview with Lorrie Nichols of The Journal of An Army Wife -- [Army Wives Lives]
Lorrie Nichols, who blogs at The Journal of an Army Wife, answered our questions about her life as an Army Wife
...Tell us a little bit about your military spouse journey.
Mike is in the Army National Guard. He hasn't been deployed, yet. He served in the Air Guard for six years, then spent several years as a civilian, and joined the Army Guard last October. We have been married for 2 1/2 years, but I have only been a military spouse for about 4 months.
What are the challenges of being a military spouse?
Military time doesn't necessarily coincide with real world time.
The Predictably Unpredictable Army Strikes Again.... -- [SpouseBuzz - Andi]
My husband has been TDY on many, many occasions throughout our marriage. I wish now that I had kept track of it because I don't know if my guesstimate of 3-4 years is on target. As for non-TDY, more permanent deployment bye-byes, we've had two. One for a year and one for seven months. Both times, we had ample warning. Both times we knew approximately when he was leaving. Both times, the house became cluttered for weeks with gear that would accompany my husband to his destination. On both occasions, I had time to process what was happening, and prepare for it.
A couple of weeks ago, my husband came home late at night, quickly packed, and was gone the next morning. It was so odd.
There was no warning. No time frame to process. No time to prepare, physically or emotionally.
They Ache -- [SpouseBuzz - Sarah]
This deployment has flown by for me because I've been distracted with my pregnancy. It's a major event that keeps my mind off missing my husband. When I do think of him, they've been self-centered or baby-centered thoughts: I wish he were here to feel the baby kick, or fetch me a glass of water, or discuss middle names in person. I've also tried to come up with some silver linings for why it's better that I've been alone all this time. And I have contingency plans in case my husband doesn't make it home in time;
Military OneSource Tax Filing Services -- [Military OneSource]
Military OneSource brings you H&R Block At Home® (formerly TaxCut) online tax filing through the Military OneSource Web site and telephonic tax consultations by calling our tax hotline at 1-800-730-3802. Prepare your 2009 state and federal taxes with this easy-to-use program. Provided by the Department of Defense, H&R Block At Home® is and free to active duty, National Guard, and Reserve service members and their families. Have questions? See our FAQs.
Tax consultants are available 7 days a week from 7 am - 11 pm ET by calling the Military OneSource Tax Hotline at 1-800-730-3802.
Please Note - You must use the link on the Military OneSource Web site to access our customized product and create your account. Do not go to the public H&R Block Web site to create a user account.
Wounded Warrior returns to West Point as WTU Commander -- [Soldiers' Angels Germany]
Capt. Scott M. Smiley is a Soldier, infantryman, Airborne Ranger, combat diver, mountain climber, skier, tri-athlete, surfer, husband, father, and now Company Commander of West Point's Warrior Transition Unit.
He's also blind.
Law barring lies about military medals faces test -- [Washington Post]
A federal law against lying about military medals is facing First Amendment challenges in Colorado and California. Lawyers in both cases have made similar arguments against the Stolen Valor Act, saying that lying is protected by the First Amendment unless it does real harm.
Why Stolen Valor doesn't violate 1st Amendment -- [This Ain't Hell...]
Last month I wrote about the Denver Post going squishy on Richard Strandlof's impending trial for a violation of the Stolen Valor Act. The Post wrote that convicting him would violate his 1st Amendment right to free speech. Well, apparently, there's some case law that says otherwise.
In 2008, Xavier Alvarez, while running for office on his local water board made the following statement on the campaign trail
Air Force Academy creates worship area for pagans, Druids -- [USA Today]
The Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs is establishing a worship area for followers of Earth-centered religions -- Wiccans, Druids, witches, pagans -- on a hill overlooking the campus, the USAFA says.
The Wiccan Cross -- [Greyhawk]
How would you complete the following sentence?
"Leaving a cross at a Wiccan* assembly area on a college campus is the equivalent of ____." (Consider the "blank" to be as long as you need.)
Why, the person who did this must be a ______.
Did you say "anonymous Christian supremacist"? Me neither.
Know why? Because first be not stupid is a good motto. At least that's what I always say.
Arrival at Home- Final Post -- [
Doc H - home from Afghanistan]
I have been home for a few days now. Tricia and the kids met me at the airport around midnight. It was a joyous reunion that was just a little overdue. Amazingly the kids went to school and continued their activities the next day. There was a nice banner on display in the house welcoming me back home. Our trip to home was even more circuitous as time went by. Due to a heavy snowstorm in Baltimore, our transatlantic flight diverted to JFK airport in New York. We had a night in a hotel nearby and completed our journey to Baltimore the next day
Shorn -- [OPFOR - Lt Col P - heading home from Afghanistan]
am I of two constant companions since mid-August of last year-- my 9mm and my M4. I turned both in today, duly cleaned (and with a small net gain of ammo, to boot). I feel oddly under-dressed without them. I also removed the tourniquet and IBD that had been in my sleeve pockets for six months. Again, it doesn't feel quite right not to have them on board.
In about 24 hours or so I'll be airborne (!) back to the States, and this whole thing will be nearly done. That is the strangest feeling of them all.
If Not Now, When?: Duty and Sacrifice in America's Time of Need Wins 2010 Colby Award -- [PR Newswire]
(Chicago, Illinois, February 3, 2010) The military memoir by Medal of Honor recipient Colonel Jack Jacobs, USA (Ret.) has won the 2010 Colby Award.
Named for the late Ambassador and former CIA Director William E. Colby, the Colby Award recognizes a first work of fiction or non-fiction that has made a significant contribution to the public's understanding of intelligence operations, military history, or international affairs. The $5,000 award will be presented by Tawani Foundation in association with the Pritzker Military Library ...
CSI: Miami - Promoting the Good in Iraq -- [A Soldier's Perspective]
Many of us have seen the MSM misrepresent or not even report the good things that our military is doing in Iraq. We see TV shows and movies on the big and small screen that stand on either side of the issue. Some are very elaborate and in your face while others are more subtle. The latter was the case in last nights episode of CSI: Miami.
I don't always watch the show, sometimes I watch "Castle", so I didn't know that Cain's son had enlisted in the Army and been sent to Iraq. At the end of the episode they showed Cain signing into a video conference on his computer. The picture we see on the computer screen is Cain's son, in battle fatigues and in Iraq. There are the usual parent/child pleasantries and concerns passed from one to another. They could have ended the scene with that, but they didn't. They go on to have Cain's son talk about rebuilding the schools and how happy the kids are to have them.
Jeremy Renner nominated for best actor in 'The Hurt Locker'
"The Hurt Locker" honored with 9 Academy Award Nominations, including Best Picture
Cast includes TAPS mentor Brian Geraghty, Film depicts military's unsung heroes
Jeremy Renner nominated for best actor in 'The Hurt Locker'
'The Hurt Locker' may rewrite script on Iraq war movies -- [NY Daily News]
..."Maybe the winds have shifted, and people are willing to think about the war in cinematic terms," says Mark Boal, who was embedded in Iraq in '04 as a freelance journalist and is now nominated for a Best Original Screenplay Oscar for "Locker."
"'Hurt Locker' works as a magnifying glass on Iraq," says Boal, "but there's also a purely experiential level to it. Even for me, as a regular popcorn-buying member of the public, it's more than a war film."
Charlie Brooker - How To Report The News
Seeking balance: the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review -- [Foreign Policy Review]
he Defense Department today released the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review, its Congressionally-mandated examination of defense programs and plans. The review is the latest milestone in Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates's campaign to focus the Defense Department on the need to win today's wars. As such, it is to be applauded. However, in concentrating on that goal, it too often shortchanges other challenges.
In its language, the 2010 QDR has clearly been Obamacized. It reads more like a corporate annual report than a strategy to guide the world's most powerful military, one that has been at war for most of the last decade. One is at pains, for example, to find in the document's 105 pages the word "win" (as in, "win the war in Afghanistan").
Don't ask Don't Tell -- [Greyhawk]
Gates and Mullen testify before the Senate Armed Services Committee, livestream:
Gates' prepared statement for the committee here.
That last line bears particular note - it's the often-ignored but fundamental and key truth at the heart of the issue - and it can't be repeated enough. "The ultimate decision rests with you, the Congress." That's not a decision Congress welcomes with open arms - and that reluctance presents a great illustration of one difference between power and responsibility - words that represent concepts that have meaning. Those concepts combined are such an enormous burden that the typical member of Congress can bear only one.
The Case Against Gays in the Military -- [Wall Street Journal]
Open homosexuality would threaten unit cohesion and military effectiveness. -- As expected, President Obama pledged during his State of the Union address to "work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans
Credit Where Credit is Due -- [BlackFive - Grim]
I know that we frequently have some philosophical disputes with the Obama administration here. Still, once in a while, it's a good idea to step back and point out the things they have gotten right.
Marine Ilario Pantano for Congress! -- [BlackFive]
We've followed the trials and tribulations of USMC First Lieutenant Ilario Pantano for awhile here on BlackFive. We've supported him since the beginning (and had to fight some of our own to do so), and, now, Ilario is running for Congress in the Congressional District NC-7. The 7th District has not had a Republican since March 3, 1871!
Pantano and his family live in North Carolina where, since 2006, he continues to serve his community as a Deputy Sheriff.
'Gays Too Precious To Risk In Combat,' Says General -- [The Onion]
Day By Day
(Need more? Dawn Patrols Archives are here.)
Iraq,
Afghanistan,
War,
Terrorism,
Military,
Politics,
Media,
MilBlogs,
dawn patrol Mudville
- via email, facebook, twitter, etc.
"you can tell these guys love him". Of course they do. He's promised to get them all out of Iraq so they won't have to fight anymore or do all the evil things Bush forced them to do. Right?
Sure, they support BEFORE he was elected, now that he is in office and they know he will cut their spending and impliment SOCIALISM, they are not as supportive as the above video displays. Just because you WANT socialims or are still blind to the obvious, doesnt mean it is not true.
And what about the CNN correspondent's comment about the "tepid" response? CNN is not really well known for their criticism of Democratic presidents.
If the Marines had been this quiet during a Bush speech, it would be 24/7 on the MSM about how they no longer support Bush and his tired polices in a war that can't be won, blah blah.
I had the same sort of feeling. Obama's visit was much more formal and so the Marines were quiet and respectful. Marines will do what the President orders whether or not that President is somebody they personally like.
I would hate for liberals (or non-military conservatives I guess) to think that Marines and other service people would do their jobs any differently, or with some sort of political agenda, depending on who the CINC is. They do as they are ordered by the leaders we elect. And they do so magnificently.
Semper Fi
The Military has and will always respects the office, respect of the man on the other hand is earned.
I hardly think that anyone in uniform is going to respect a cheap, crooked, lying Chicago politician. Were I back on active duty I sure as hell would not.
Perhaps he will earn the respect of the military, though nothing in his history would indicate this happening.
The military will do its job, though this is totally different in how they view BHO.
Ron Snyder
No doubt the video comparison is unfair. The settings are different, and there are different protocols.
However, I've always been blown away by the amount of raucous enthusiasm troops always displayed when Bush spoke to them. Even in Iraq, and he being the man who sent them on that grim assignment that no doubt had killed many of their friends. I really have no way of knowing this for sure, but something tells me that if there comes a time when we are presented with an honest comparable situation, Bush will win that contest easily.
But this video comparison does not in any way malign the military, or imply that the troops wouldn't do their usual excellent job regardless of who's president. It's merely an attempt, albeit a flawed one, to gauge/compare the troops inner feelings toward the two men, for whatever that's worth.
As RLHII said, their respect needs to be earned. Obama may yet do that, (somehow I doubt it) but he's hurt himself badly in their eyes already by not supporting their MISSION in Iraq. He won the presidency in large part by in effect working against what they were trying to accomplish. He's got a lot of catching up to do.
Perhaps a game of horse with each soldier, and let them all win.
How come most of the marines in the second footage of Obama are black? That doesn't fit the demographics of the corp. Was this a locality thing?
I re-checked the maligned video, found further on the Camp Lejune visit by our current President. Our current President comes in "Hail to the Chief" and that pomp while our previous CiC just kinda walked into the room. Departures were equally disonant, Bush hugging and talking and Barry going off to more marshal music and talking to Oak Leafs and/or Four Stripers.
As far as our current CiC's visit to Kuwait, I truly didn't see the love there. Even male WWE wrestlers got more love in theater than Barry did.
Oh, wait, is logistic/admin Kuwait "in theater"?
Compare Bush Thanksgiving in Iraq (and no, the turkey was not plastic) to Obama Xmas in Hawaii.
Previous commenter said it all, "Obama may yet do that" (gain the troops respect)but he, along with me, doubts it.
Papa Doc Obama has already declared that he believes the Constitution to be flawed.
Our forces take an oath to defend that Constitution, as BO did.
The difference is that our fighting forces will actually defend the Constitution while BO tries to destroy it.
Would you fight with this defeatist weasel as your Commander In Chief?
Sorry, Greyhawk, but I think you misread this one. Of course Marines will do their duty regardless of who is in command. But it is not their DUTY to explode with enthusiasm for any president -- that is a spontaneous response. Are you trying to tell me that those who greeted Bush had NOT been called to attention?
One of the biggest differences, as someone pointed out, is that Obama entered to the sounds of Hail to the Chief -- I'll go ahead and be cynical, and suggest that this was a pompous little piece of cover to make him look "Commandery" in front of real soldiers and patriots, and to veil the underwhelming welcome. Same for his exit. I found his speech at Lejeune repugnant insofar as he is patently clueless about what is and has been going on in Iraq -- the idea that HE can tell these people when the war will end! Buy a paper, Sugar -- it's OVER. And the idea that HE will initiate the supplanting of combat by training and civil affairs duties! What does he think the military has been doing? The civil affairs work has been happening to one degree or another since 2003, but especially since 2006! In fact, it's fair to say that our military are the world's most successful practitioners at COMMUNITY ORGANIZING. They could teach this Chicago phony a thing or two about that. What an empty-headed sham.
Greyhawk's "analysis" is interesting not for what she points to but in what she leaves out.
Was talking to one of my buddies about this:
Greyhawk specifically ignores the fact that the Marines Bush is talking to are at "parade-rest" and in formed ranks, a position in which military protocol ALSO forbids free motion and applause; same rules for "uh-ten-hut!"
So if the Marines at Lejeune weren't supposed to cheer because they were at "attention",
then the Marines in Iraq weren't supposed to cheer because they were at "parade-rest".
However, the real gist of this matter isn't the specific position of whether the Marines are allowed to cheer or not: the gist is whether the the Rank and File, the INSTITUTION, respects the man in the office, not just the office itself. And it is here that Greyhawk is lying through her teeth.
I don't care what justification she uses or what "evidence" she purports. It doesn't even have anything to do with the obama/dubya video.
Nobody I've talked to in the Marine Corps is confident about Obama. The reasons are varied, of course, but the result is still the same; few have any confidence that he will back them up when the chips are down. It has less to do with political affiliations than with the "warrior culture" of the Marine Corps; in that, I agree that Obama has no idea how to identify with them or their comrades in the other services, let alone lead them during a war.
That is no trivial chasm to bridge.
And what's worse, the Marines don't think Obama feels the need to make an attempt to bridge it.
They will follow his orders in accordance to their constitutional duty. Beyond that is a matter for each Marine to decide, AS IS THEIR RIGHT (which will be seen in re-up/re-enlistment ceremonies and morale in the years to come).
What you saw, Greyhawk, was, at best, a Marine Corps that wasn't quite sure what to make of its new CINC.
You say that any Marine that does not support Obama as much as they supported Bush is an insult to the "integrity of the US military, and in my mind reflects both wishful thinking and ignorance on the part of anyone making the claim."
I think it is you who are ignorant if you expect Obama to get the same embrace from the military as Bush got.
I think you are the one involved in wishful thinking if think you heard an applause as boisterous and genuine as the one Bush received. As if Obama's choregraphed visits were equivalent to the spontaneity that Bush received even when the cameras weren't rolling.
I think you owe an apology to the Marines, soldiers, sailors and airmen who you think are "an insult to the integrity of the US Military" because they suspect that their lives are nothing more than political abstracts to Obama (it's more unanimous the closer you get to the trigger-pullers and the red-button pushers).
We have so few videos of Obama with the troops that it's really hard to say what kind of reaction should be deemed indicative of how they really feel. I think the video was really more an attempt at a funny ha ha and wasn't intending to make anyone think the Marines would be disloyal and not follow orders because they think Obama is a buffoon (if they do think that). It's okay to laugh at Obama, isn't it? That's the point of the video. Kind of refreshing after months of Obama adoration we've had to endure from the media. Everybody looovves Obama, everybody...oooohhh....
And is it really such a stretch to think that the military found Bush more simpatico than Obama? At least with Bush you got the feeling he actually liked being around the military and wasn't only using them as a prop (maybe using them as a prop, yes, but not just that). Obama? Who knows? But nobody thinks they aren't going to do their jobs regardless of who's in charge.
"No doubt the video comparison is unfair. The settings are different, and there are different protocols."
It's not about protocol.
I know American civilians have been conditioned to think that the military is full of by-the-book stick in the muds with iron poles up their ass.
To be sure, we have our share of those, but we also have plenty of good CO's, NCOs, Desrons, Staff, Stars who, when they call the crew, company, what-not to the assembly area, fantail, whatever, can relate easily to the troops, are open to questions and jokes and simply emerse themselves with the people under their command.
It's about reading the command climate and that atmosphere is heavily dependent on the man in charge, or at the podium (yes, even ships and hangars keep podiums with unit insignias in their storage for such occassions).
It really shouldn't take a military background to be able to understand this synergy and what's happening in that video.
You might think, "Well, Greyhawk proves that even someone with a military background can get it wrong."
That's just the thing.
I can't imagine anyone in the military misreading the Obama reaction THIS badly. Christ, even the brass and the suits BEHIND Obama were trying to encourage the Marines to clap. And the Marines only applauded tentatively after he said some things that he probably didn't believe in anyway (read the speech he gave to see why the Marines might have liked some of his teleprompter points).
And then there's her claim that the Marines like Obama; that's the kicker.
Greyhawk didn't "err".
She's lying.
Period.
Sorry Grayhawk, but I must disagree with you on this one. My son, a Marine, called me from Iraq after the election. The feeling from his fellow grunts was "Is America nuts?"
Yes, as Marines, they will respect the rank, But they also have a pretty strong BS detector and they know when an officer cares about the men and when he cares about his career. I would bet that we will see fewer and fewer photo ops with the Marines.
I'm surprised no one has pointed this out before, as I'm sure I'm not the only former Marine to read here. :)
There are a few pieces of music that Marine Corps protocol demands rigid attention for, and one of them is "Hail to the Chief". It it was playing when Obama was entering, that plays a role in the Marines' reaction.
I believe that having a Marine say "Let's welcome our Commander in Chief" (as happens for Bush) makes for a different introduction than the one Obama got. Spontaneous? Not exactly. As always, it must be asked: how were the troops in the audience chosen? Were they ordered to appear, offered the opportunity, or hand-picked? It makes a difference. I'd need to see unedited footage to determine whether or not the Revovideo's claim is as authentic as a ShamWow! advertisement, but I think I already know the answer.
Also: apple, meet orange. Orange, apple.
I believe that having a Marine say "Let's welcome our Commander in Chief" (as happens for Bush) makes for a different introduction than the one Obama got. Spontaneous? Not exactly. As always, it must be asked: how were the troops in the audience chosen? Were they ordered to appear, offered the opportunity, or hand-picked? It makes a difference. I'd need to see unedited footage to determine whether or not the Revovideo's claim is as authentic as a ShamWow! advertisement, but I think I already know the answer.
Also: apple, meet orange. Orange, apple.
"There are a few pieces of music that Marine Corps protocol demands rigid attention for, and one of them is "Hail to the Chief""
Indeed, that's the protocol while the Marine Band is playing it.
And to avoid moving or talking, let alone cheering, Marines are called to "attention". You're not supposed to move or clap...
Just as you're not supposed to move or clap at "parade-rest".
So if Obama's audience wasn't "supposed" to cheer, neither was Bush's audience.
All of which is beside the point. If you understood that alot of this is about servicemen be familiar with and knowing what to expect from your Commander (the biggest hurdle of any change in command), the answer to all this is pretty obvious.
This is not about protocol. This is about whether the Marines feel confident enough to give the chief a raucous welcome or a neutral salute. It's the equivalent of "We respect the office. The man....well, we're not sure about him yet".
And just as importantly, it's about whether Obama has himself has confidence in his own troops. I know many Marines will scoff at any suggestion that they have anything to prove to an empty suit.
That's not what I mean.
I mean does Obama have enough confidence to enter a room packed with Marines in Iraq with the big media watching. In confidence that they will whoop it up for him?
Greyhawk says "absolutely".
I think she is full of it and the response is going to be far more muted.
And I think Obama and his handlers know it, which is why I think we'll be seeing Marines at "attention" alot on the few occassions that he talks to any of them.
"how were the troops in the audience chosen? Were they ordered to appear, offered the opportunity, or hand-picked? It makes a difference. I'd need to see unedited footage to determine whether or not the Revovideo's claim is as authentic as a ShamWow! advertisement, but I think I already know the answer."
Spoken like a true left-wing conspiracy theorist.
They were "mustered", called to assembly in ranks and waiting at "parade-rest" in formation.
When things like that occur in the military, it's less about "being ordered" than it is about "knowing it's what you're expected to do".
Do you think any Marine would be UA from a presidential gathering?
Well, I can guess quite a few who wouldn't want to be a part of Obama's audience, but they'd still form up. That's what they're supposed to do.
But you think the Marines in Bush's audience were "faking" it because they were "ordered"?
Have it your way. You clearly don't know any Marines if you think that's even remotely true.
Did the officers and NCOs from the battallion down to the squad leaders tell their fellow Marines?
"OK, when Commander in Chief walks in, we're going turn this place into the Thunderdome".
Absolutely.
"Stay in ranks, look official, everyone, especially front and center, should be in "parade rest", it IS the President, but when he comes in, you can give him the big "Oorah!"
Yep.
And do you think those officers and NCO's would have told their Marines that if they thought their Marines didn't already want to cheer.
Absolutely NOT.
Do you think these instructions came from Bush? That those Marines would have been able to fake that enthusiasm under orders? That the officers and NCO's down to the PFCs would have gone along with it?
That Bush and his "cronnies" would have issued such "orders" believing the Marines would go along with it?
Who are you kidding?
Dependent upon all this is the presumption that Obama didn't want the Marines to cheer him as they did Bush.
Yeah right.
Of course this media creature wanted the adoration and political advantage of being cheered by "the troops." with cameras rolling.
However, whether he thought he could get it, and whether the Marines would have given him anything near Bush's reception, is not open to question;
That would be a big "negative".
And Greyhawk knows it.
Bush, of course, was no media figure and didn't care for the press.
Good grief.
I just saw Instapundit say that the Marines were "at ease".
If someone can't understand the basics of military formations that you can find anywhere on the internet, how are they going to understand the complexities (well, they SHOULD be SIMPLE to understand) of what is happening on the video?
Instapundit says that the Marines with Bush were "at-ease" because someone claiming to be a "naval officer" told him.
Even when they miss the point entirely, they're STILL wrong on their facts.
"At ease"?
"At ease" allows the Marines to move about, but the Marines with Bush are NOT "at ease".
They may be emotionally at ease, but they are NOT in the military POSITION of "at-ease".
They are at "parade-rest" with both hands folded behind their back.
Not only that, but in that semi-formal gathering, the Marines would use the semi-formal "at ease" position of both hands folded IN FRONT of them, especially those front and center.
Everything which (AGAIN) is beside the point.
These people still don't get that the gist of this episode is not about about whether the Marines are in "attention" or cheering, but WHY they're in "attention" and cheering and how the decisions to do it came to be.
The Marines in Bush's audience were not terribly concerned about having their feet the correct number of inches apart (I need to check the blue book to see how many, but my buddies can tell me off the top of their heads) and their hands folded high on the belt which is extremely uncomfortable during extended periods of time like a speech. Servicemen and booters typically pass out if left in that position for too long.
Aside from the fact that Instapundit and this "naval officer" are just plain wrong (and every servicemen knows it), the main point in this episode can be boiled down to:
The Marines know and trust Bush.
They don't know and many don't trust Obama.
End of discussion.
Good Night.
I don't think there's any question that the military was generally enthusiastic about Pres. Bush. I believe that they're less so about Pres. Obama, but I think Greyhawk is correct when he points out that this is a different situation.
I'm just speculating here, but the impression I'm getting is that in the video, Bush was there to address the troops. They obviously appreciated it, and were probably told it was okay to go a little nuts.
Obama, IMO, was there to give a speech, with the Marines as a backdrop. The situation was more formal, as shown by "Hail to the Chief" (and, IIRC, the National Anthem right before that). The Marines were probably told to act more... formally? dignified? Not sure what word I'm searching for here.
Oh, and "semi-formal" at ease? Is that a Marine thing? I don't remember that from the Army. Our "semi-formal" version would probably have appeared to be a relaxed version of parade rest.
This is embarrassing. Those marines at the Bush speech are NOT at parade rest. They are moving, have their heads cocked to the side, eyes not front, etc. Hands folded behind your back is not all there is to parade rest. Just look at the group directly below the podium.
The events were of different types. Obama was giving a speech, Bush was giving a pep talk, and the formalities of the two and the audiences were vastly different. The comparison shown in the video is as authentic as a ShamWow! informercial.
I'm not saying the troops love Obama universally, nor was that the case with Bush. I'm not saying there isn't any truth to the idea that many in the military distrust Obama. All I'm saying is that the comparison given tells me nothing about the facts and a lot (that's two separate words, by the way) about the maker of the first video. It's not convincing me of anything, so it's an utter failure as propaganda.
First, let me say that Rykehaven is a rude pompous ass and that Greyhawk deserves better than to be called a "liar".
That being said, Ryke is correct on alot of the details about how we received these 2 VIPs. Even if I think he got unnecessarily detailed and bitchy for normal people to digest.
As for the trivial question of at ease and attention, he's got a pretty strong case. I'm a marine myself and those marines aren't in the at-ease position, they're at parade rest. The fact that they're moving only proves that they're relaxed about it.
I think that's the entire disagreement here.
Jrman and Greyhawk use the letter of the regulations and are missing something more profound. Something that'd be clear to any marine watching this because we've all had VIPs give speeches in front of us.
It's not just about their position, as Ryke stated, is this or that, or that they're not at-ease which involves locking your thumbs with your hands in front of your crotch.
It involves the relationship the Corps has as a warfighter institution with the man charged with sending them to war.
Nobody commanding men in the field would be tone-deaf enough to watch that video and say that those reactions were a result of "regulations".
Considering all the griping I've heard in Helmand, I find the notion that the Marines "like" Obama rather mysterious.
One other thing I'd like to note:
I can imagine any number of squad leaders in my battalion revving up his troops to give Bush a good sendoff to show their appreciation.
Can any Marine out there who's served in Iraq or Afghanistan imagine the same thing happening if they heard they were supposed to show appreciation for Obama.
And if they say they can, the follow up is :
appreciation for what?
I think a lot of people here are letting their emotional response to Obama overload their rational, better selves. The marines have a 234 year record of being awesome, which is 100 years more than any existing political party. Obama sees more Marines than anyone else, since they fly his helicopter. Long after Obama has his term or two the Marines will still be there doing the hard work, and all the popularity contests will have moved on to the next guy.
Meh - if my patience with commenters isn't legendary it should be. That said, google "rykehaven" for some insight. Common thread: Rykehaven invariably is spokesperson for "buddies" who hate the Germans, the English, and Obama. This phenomenon appears limited to milblogs.
Aight, I don't want to get deep into this point, but there is no protocol wherein it's acceptable to have a room/formation "called" to Parade Rest for the entry of a commander. Period. End of story.
However, generally when I stand I tend to clasp my hands behind my back at a parade rest type position. It's pretty much habit now, after years of not standing around with my hands in my pockets.
From reading the comments, it is heartwarming to read that regardless of who is in the office, it is understood that it is the Marine's job to follow the orders of your commander in chief.
At the same time, it scares me that these same people have no comprehension that people can totally disagree with their mission, think it wrong, think it a mistake, and still respect their service, still realize that it is a GREAT thing to have such a proud group of great men and women protecting us regardless.
I completely agree that respect is earned not given, and completely respect the average Marine's apprehensiveness to their change in leadership.
I do however ponder how Mr. Bush ever earned that respect with this group to begin with.