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.
I waded into the comments section at the NYT in hope that some of the readers saw how incredibly crass Obama's photo op of this. If he had visited quietly without cameras, I'd have been very impressed. But the photos... I am literally ill with the thought of the Commander in Chief using a dead soldier as a PR photo op.
I perused the first page of comments and most people thought it was "fantastic" and "showed more empathy than the Bush-Cheney administration ever did." They called him a hero and a man of great integrity for doing this.
I want to cry.
So if he goes to pay his repsects, he's just looking for a photo-op.
Or if he doesn't go pay his respects, he's dishonoring their service.
Without the photos, there IS no respect. Without the photos there's nothing to care about, and no coverage of the soldier's return home. If he visits "quietly," so what? Nobody cares, and nobody remembers.
By showing up, Obama guarantees press coverage and reminds all the head-in-the-sand lazy, fatbody Americans that there's actually two wars going on.
So yeah, it's a photo op. It did its job, and it got people's attention.
I don't care about whether people see it as "empathy" or "integrity" or any nonsense like that. They rationalize their way if they want. It's not about Obama, or any politican.
He could have gone any time he wanted since the day he was sworn in. instead, he picks now? What is different between then and now? ANSWER: Then, he was still playing gung-ho about Afghan being 'the real battle.'
Now? Not so much, so get the press gaggle in tow and put on a show.
I'm (grudgingly) willing to give the President the benefit of the doubt and believe that he would've "gone to Dover" anyway. But it's hard for me to read this - "Bush spent time with grieving military families but never went to Dover" - from the Guardian and not infer that the Guardian was taking a slap at Bush... when the salient fact is that Bush was unstintingly attentive to military families and chose not to turn their private tragedies into circuses, however inadvertently. (Being a President tends to gain you an entourage, however little you may want one.)
I would've liked Obama's choice better if he had, say, "gone to Dover" but had assiduously avoided the cameras. However, since he's never assiduously avoided the cameras, I recognize my sentiment as bootless...
NS Webster, I couldn't disagree with you more. If there had simply been a press release from the WH detailing his visit, and no cameras on him, it would have meant just as much to his supporters and would not have offended families of service members like myself. It is telling that only one family agreed to allow cameras when usually more than half do so. The families saw this for what it was, and you are naive to not realize that.
I'm sorry, but in context of the hits he's getting for dithering/waffling about strategy while Americans are dying for lack of backup, it can be nothing but a photo op to his own personal benefit. Just read the comments at the NYT and you'll see it played exactly as intended: "Oh, look at his compassion, I can see why he's taking so long to decide! Oh, this is so special, see how much he cares? Oh, oh, oh, he's such a leader!"
Meanwhile the physical embodiment of a family's love, and now-dashed hope and dreams, touches back down in the country for which he gave his life. I guarantee you, 99.9% of the people commenting there know not a thing about that man, nor will they ever think of him again. If the point was to drive home the "reality of war," it failed miserably.
"The images and the sentiment of the president's five-hour trip to Delaware were intended by the White House to convey to the nation that Mr. Obama was not making his Afghanistan decision lightly or in haste."
I'm not seeing anything about honor, empathy, or integrity in that quote.
Actually, I haven't been in the least offended that he hasn't "paid his respects" at Dover before. That is a deeply personal and intimate thing, and something that it never occurred to me Bush or any other president should attend. The ceremony associated with it, being carried by bothers in arms, etc.... He may be the Commander in Chief, but on occasions like this he is an outsider. And as president, his visit could never be anything other than a photo op unless he did it privately.
As Commander-in-Chief he is NOT an outsider and obviously took great care to make sure he did what he did correctly. He rendered a very good salute, he stayed in step and formation, and by being prepared he did his best to honor their service. I respect him for doing so.
Right on, Sarge! It was DESIGNED to make HIM LOOK GOOD, not to make people aware that there's a war on.
As a commander in chief, he's a disgrace. Lead from the front, not from the funeral. Get off the golf course and go to A-stan. You want the ground truth? Get your Brooks Brothers butt over to where the men are fighting and dying.
It bugs the crap out of me that he got a photo op out of this... but I am glad to see that he's finally paying respects to those who have given all for our country. He could have done this a long time ago, but waited until we had a terrible day, with 14 dead, to do so. The fact that only one of the 14 families gave photo consent says a lot to me about the remaining 13.
Bush met with MANY families of the fallen- and wounded- during his two terms, but he never made a big deal about it. I respect the hell out of that decision. Those who know... know. And those who do not make silly comments like "he showed more empathy than the Bush-Cheney administration ever did."
I cannot fault him for showing up or spending time with the families. Press coverage of the event was not planned by Obama- it was granted by one of the families. I will, however, tear him to shreds if he falters and becomes too weak-kneed to issue the orders to get the job done in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Of course he got a photo op out of it. Do you honestly believe the most media-savvy president ever would have done it if no families had agreed?
Without the photos, there IS no respect. Without the photos there's nothing to care about, and no coverage of the soldier's return home. If he visits "quietly," so what? Nobody cares, and nobody remembers.
Mr Webster, This is what it is, using our fallen as a prop for a photo-op.
The only respect he needs to earn is from the families of the fallen and they don't need a camera because they're right there. Trust me, they care and they remember.
This press coverage is not getting the attention of the "head-in-the-sand lazy, fatbody Americans" they're at the mall and don't care.
This is ALL about Obama.
How does this make him look good? It's not exactly a feel-good image.
All the hippies who were demanding Bush go to funerals would have said the exact same thing if he had ever actually gone to one - that it's a cynical photo-op, blah blah blah.
Believe me, I have no respect for the people who are saying this somehow proves Obama's "integrity" - it has nothing to do with Obama, and they're just using him to make themselves feel better about their faux patriotism. It's not his moment - he's sharing someone elses, the returning soldiers. It's not like he was a campaign speech there. He showed up, saluted the soldiers, and left. He's the President, and he gets to do that.
As for the quote: "The images and the sentiment of the president's five-hour trip to Delaware were intended by the White House to convey to the nation that Mr. Obama was not making his Afghanistan decision lightly or in haste."
Who said that? It's not a quoted remark, it's a news reporter's analysis. And I don't even know what it means, anyway. What's one got to do with the other?
"How does this make him look good? It's not exactly a feel-good image."
I think it was a bad idea from the get-go, but in the minds of many it does make him look good - so what I think doesn't matter.
And unless he pulls out of Afghanistan he'll have plenty more chances to look good for them in the years to come. The question in my mind is how long does he think they'll continue praise his caring nature? And what will he do when they stop?
What can I tell you? If it's "ALL about Obama," then it was "ALL about Bush."
It's just two sides of the same coin, and it's always cynical and it's always bitter. It's sad, is what it is.
What can I tell you? If it's "ALL about Obama," then it was "ALL about Bush."
But Bush didn't position himself behind caskets for photo ops! Nor did he invite press cameras into his meetings with families of the wounded and fallen!
He should have! A picture of his meeting with Cindy Sheehan would have gone a long way to dispel her claims that he refused to meet with her.
No one believes that, everyone knows that he met with her, she has even admitted it.
For my part, I always thought the decision to let families choose whether or not they wanted photos was the best one the DoD could have made.
The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the blog post From the Front: 10/29/2009 News and Personal dispatches from the front and the home front.
As I said when I opposed repealing the ban on photographing the coffins: If it takes a photo of a flag-draped coffin to "honor" the dead, then honoring the dead is not their intention." How effective to the political statement the WH was making would this have been if "A small contingent of... [WH advisors] accompanied Mr. Obama to Dover, where he arrived at 12:34 a.m. aboard Marine One. He returned to the South Lawn of the White House at 4:45 a.m." after paying his respects to the war dead would have been buried on page 10??
As I also said then, "Is there a political or monetary profit to be made [from lifting the ban]? Yes, I see." I still see.
"But Bush didn't position himself behind caskets for photo ops! Nor did he invite press cameras into his meetings with families of the wounded and fallen!"
If that's how you see it, that's fine, because I think any CinC needs to sometimes stand in front of the caskets of the men he sent to battle...so we just agree to disagree...I personally believe Bush owed it to the soldiers - as their commander - to show up when some, not all, returned home at Dover. BUT, I'm not at all upset or irate that Bush didn't, and I don't see political calculation in that decision. He made a choice that he felt was appropirate with the situation. I have an opinion, but I'm sitting on my couch. Bush had to make a real world choice, same as Obama.
And of course the hippies used it against him - "oh Bush is disrespecting the dead, oh why can't he go to a funeral, oh it's so terrible!" Which is absurd.
So there's really no difference between that, and to seeing cynical intentions when Obama actually shows up. Switch the words around and it's basically the same partisan argument.
You see it that Bush should have stayed in the background, despite that left-wing criticism. No problem. As long as you're consistent that Clinton, Nixon, Johnson, Reagan should also have never appeared at these return ceremonies, I have no problem with your point of view critiquing Obama. I know that Reagan was there when the Marines came back from Beirut, and I think he should have been. So, we simply disagree philosophically and we're obviously never going to come to the same position.
To me, it's not a political issue. It is ANY CinC's choice of how to honor the dead, and I'll take their intentions at face value. People want to call me naive? Whatever. There's a million other things to be cynical about.
Considering the timing, its hard not to be cynical and see a political motive in Obama's visit to Dover. Charges of dithering on making a decision about Afghanistan, while getting in 22 rounds of golf in 9 months have been making the guy look pretty bad. It has also been coming out that Bush gave up the game when the shooting started, as he did not want a family to see photos of him on the course on the day that they received news of their loved one's death. It appears to me that considering the timing, and how unusual this type of gesture is from Obama, the visit was pure damage control.
If it wasn't political then we wouldn't have known it happened.
" As long as you're consistent that Clinton, Nixon, Johnson, Reagan should also have never appeared at these return ceremonies, I have no problem with your point of view critiquing Obama."
Look out, it's someone with some intellectual integrity. Quick, everyone find a reason not to acknowledge this.
I bet that'll go down as well as me pointing out that if the idea is that bodies of fallen soldiers shouldn't be used for partisan political point scoring, you'd have made a far more compelling case if you'd disabled the comment function.
I'm sorry but I have a hard time seeing any non-veteran like Obama rendering a salute. Bush served, Obama didn't and that tells me all I need to know about the latter.
Well on Imus this morning it was all-
"That creep Bush never did anything like this"...
Well duh!
The ban was just lifted six months ago and but since President Bush didn't telegraph meeting with the families all over the world-it never happened. That's not just how The I-Man thinks that's about how everyone thinks.
If the press never told them it happened-it didn't happen. That's the danger of a bias or lazy press.
On the same show, Thomas Freidman was presented as a big "expert" on Afghanistan-because he "visited" three times.
He according to Friedman has thought seriously and long about Afghanistan and because he studied the Middle East during college he was able to draw certain conclusions and wrote a piece for the paper.
Ghee how many military people did Friedman consult?
Friedman talked to Obama for five hours over golf. How much time has McChrystal had with Obama?
But, even on he FOX Business Channel-during the Imus show-
Friedman is the expert.
Friedman,is the go to guy because-he's dedicated three visits to the area-of perhaps a couple of days a piece.
Never mind the military who have done three tours...
Beside the point that most of Friedman's nouvelle observations where based on parallels to old nation state conflicts and not the new parameters of terrorism.
The arrogance of the media in full bloom-and the Presidency that loves them.
FbL
"Do you honestly believe the most media-savvy president ever would have done it if no families had agreed?"
I think that question was answered way back when Obama took his triumphal campaign march through Europe, where he actually cancelled his visit to Landstuhl, when he discovered he couldn't drag a photographer along. He decided to pass the time in his hotel gym instead.
Let's do the math in Obama Time-
McChrystal-
15 minutes on the tarmac in Copenhagen.
Friedman the Arrogant Poseur five hours.
It's the Maholo/hollow Presidency.
I despise Obama, but this is a shitty report - let the man be President for God's sake. He is honouring dead American soldiers. He isn't campaigning, for once. This kind of reportage should be left to the lefties - you should be ashamed of yourself.
I do not appreciate the President's actions. Can, or should, he be there every time a fallen member is brought home? Why does any one service member or group "deserve" his personal attention and honor more than another?
President Bush's decision to not attend ceremonies at Dover or funerals was because due to the requirements of the office he could not guarantee he could show the same respect to all fallen members. What he could, and did, guarantee, though, was to make time in his schedule to personally meet the NOK for any who desired.
He also managed to meet with his commanders in the theater a bit more frequently than every seventy days.
The great lie in the media's coverage is the explicit implication that Bush avoided dealing with the war dead. In fact he was a regular visitor to families all across the nation after the bodies had been returned. See this from 2003 in the LA Times
http://articles.latimes.com/2003/nov/25/nation/na-bush25
Here is the truth
"White House officials say Bush eschews public memorials in favor of private meetings with families, which he feels show more respect for their grief.
"The president believes that this is an appropriate way to meet with them, to meet privately with them, to express his appreciation both as commander in chief and on behalf of the American people for all that these families have sacrificed," White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan said on the way to Ft. Carson."
How about this story from 2005
http://wizbangblog.com/content/2005/08/15/bush-meets-with.php
Here is the truth
"Privately, Bush has met with about 900 family members of some 270 soldiers killed in Iraq or Afghanistan. The conversations are closed to the press, and Bush does not like to talk about what goes on in these grieving sessions, though there have been hints."
I'm pleased President Obama went to Dover to pay his respects, but given how little he's done so far, the media hosanna's are disgraceful when measured against President Bush's behavior.
I know when I first heard it this morning all the BREATHLESS reporting about the "surprise" visit I thought I was going to hear he was in Afghanistan but NO he crawled out in the dead of night to witness his failure to ACT in person!
This jerk BEAT up on President Bush every single day and made the war in Iraq DRAG because of politics here but this is the "good" war and the one he was going to win but he is too lily livered to WIN IT!
Obama's having the time of his worthless life; junkets, AF-1, golf, date nights, WH parties - and 'best' of all, dismantling the very foundation of this once-great country.
And why the Scots-Irish of the DoD sit by like catatonic zombies while Obama campaigns on the graves of our fallen soldiers, that's the mystery, and the insult.
"As long as you're consistent that Clinton, Nixon, Johnson, Reagan should also have never appeared at these return ceremonies"
I won't criticize a President for going to a return ceremony, nor for not going. Turning them into photo ops is another matter, and any President (of either party) can legitimately be subject to criticism for doing so. The photo op makes it about them, and not about the fallen servicemember(s).
I recognize that this is a generality, and that there can be exceptions... for example, attending a return ceremony on Memorial Day could be a legitimate and powerful message.
In my opinion, of course.
This bastard has as little use for the military as Clinton did. He used this dead serviceman as a prop to try and convince the gullible that he actually cares about the military who sacrifice so much for the nation. Sorry, this man's not buying it. I know too much about this liar.
I'll ask the same question I've seen asked lots of other places: If Obama truly hated the country and wanted to destroy it totally, WHAT WOULD HE HAVE DONE DIFFERENTLY TO THIS POINT?
My answer: nothing. Thanks 52%.
What I noticed is that his Marine guards have taught him how to render a proper salute. Notice the contrast between his hand salute and the Navy/Army/Air Force dude next to him.
Semper fi!
My understanding is the original plan was for the president to raise the fallen there on the ramp, but Republicans opposed the measure.
US Troops and American allies,
prepare to be abandoned
The strategy he devised in March is a failure. His dithering caused this, then he has the gall to salute the death he caused, for a photo op. Sickening.
We shouldn't be surprised though. He did say in his book, he Would Stand Muslim when the political winds shifted. I would say they have shifted.
I made the error in looking at what the Obama fan club was saying about this stunt - it was appalling. You'd think he turned water into wine. Yet, not one word about the troops, the DEA agents or the families. Their insults against Pres. Bush did outweigh their congratulations to Obama though. It was like a sporting event. I have been annoyed all day.
Of course it was a political gesture; the President is a politician. But it was also the right thing to do. Whatever hay Obama hopes to make from the photo-op, at least he got this right: showing respect to a fellow American who sacrificed a whole lot more than he ever has for the country. By no means am I a fan of the current commander-in-chief, but we ought to give him credit where it's due.
I was appalled by the photo op of a man saluting who not only did not serve (some presidents didn't) but who I think we can all agree would never have served and would have escaped to Canada had the Draft ensnared him. He hates this country and he loathes our military. I am in a large group of friends on FB (many of whom are retired military, as is my husband) and the opinion is uniformly negative on this photo op. The most common complaint was the picture makes them want to puke!
One can argue it was the right thing to do, it's about the fallen and their service, not Obama, yada yada yada. A huge swathe of the country ain't buyin' it and are outraged. And that's the truth.
I couldn't disagree more.
I am former military and married to a retiree, and we both found the President's honoring the service of the military members he commands comforting and well executed. He is not required to salute if he has not had former military experience, but as Commander-in-Chief he has the option to do so and he obviously took the time to learn to do it right and not render a sloppy salute or awkward steps. I respect him for trying, and just plain being there.
Many commenters here find Obama's appearance at Dover offensive based on their impression it was just a photo op. Others suggest such a presidential visit was long over due.
Bush 43 made a practice of meeting privately with family. We know what he did and his stated reason for doing so. If Obama now makes a practice of being present to witness the return of our fallen we will know this is the observance he has chosen to make. If we never see or read of him being in attendance in Dover again we will know this was just a crass attempt to burnish his image with the public.
Only time will demonstrate the truth behind this visit.
The 'never served' crowd here seems very unmilitary to me. Very uniformed. Must be a bunch of commenters who don't understand the U.S. military, or have zero experience with it.
Every American President serves.
Reagan went to Dover. Clinton went to Dover. Bush's dad went to Dover. Obama went to Dover. It's all about the chain of command and respect for those who serve under you.
Obama is not fit the shine the shoes of the newest military recruit.
In mind mind, meeting the return of American service members who have died in a terrorist attack (as Reagan did) at a time when we are not at war is a very different context than Obama's visit amid a politically-charged America and debate about the war and questions about his leadership of it. I would've been appalled if Bush had done it, too. Actually, I'd have been shocked, as that was not Bush's style (as has been pointed out above).
@Ed Garland - your comment is offensive to the entire military community.
The President is fit to shine a recruit's shoes, to give him his orders for battle, and to mourn his passing.
As was the President before him, and the one before him.
It's called the American form of government, our way of life, embodied in the flag those men died for.
I wonder if the families were inconvenienced by all the extra security that goes into a Presidential visit. It had to have added to their stress at least, one more thing to deal with. I understand Obama met with the families, including the ones who didn't authorize media coverage. Did they have a choice? Did they feel pressured in any way to spend time with him? (Bush only met with families who wanted to meet with him.) Maybe the families were happy having Obama there, I don't know. Who can know? It's not enough to refuse media coverage if the President and his entourage decide they want to show up anyway and share in the moment.
The NYTs must have received a friendly phone call from someone at the WH.
They changed this quote:
The images and the sentiment of the president's five-hour trip to Delaware were intended by the White House to convey to the nation that Mr. Obama was not making his Afghanistan decision lightly or in haste.
to this:
The image of the commander in chief standing on a darkened tarmac, offering a salute to one of the soldiers, highlighted the poignancy of a decision he is facing.
I read an earlier NYT article that said Obama had saluted one of those soldiers. Later in the article it was noted that only one family approved the photo op. I wonder if it's coincidence that he saluted just one soldier and it was the soldier whose family approved the photo op.
"Turning them into photo ops is another matter, and any President (of either party) can legitimately be subject to criticism for doing so. The photo op makes it about them, and not about the fallen servicemember(s)."
"Can" is a useful word, isn't it.
I recall seeing Bush standing on the rubble of the WTCs talking into a bullhorn and not once wondering how fortunate it was that the cameramen got a good footing just in time to catch that speech, for obvious reasons.
Now I won't criticize him for doing that, because that was the whole point of him being there, to be seen doing that. But I sure as shit know you never did then or since pal.
This being the pitfall of the after-the-fact invented principle to be applied to the team you don't like. It only works if your team didn't play the last game and won't play the next.
John | October 30, 2009 2:06 AM | Reply
"I read an earlier NYT article ... I wonder if it's coincidence that he saluted just one soldier and it was the soldier whose family approved the photo op."
Why would YOU wonder about this if you're the only source of this ridiculous lie ?
Just say he pissed on the coffins as they rolled off and get it over with you pissweak little coward.
The president was there for every soldier. He saluted each. The media was only authorized to cover one. Media coverage is at the discretion of the family of the soldier.
The rightness or wrongness of the story is up for discussion, reasonable folks can disagree (some without Party politics involved) but facts are facts.
Taking the cameras along ruined the whole thing as true gesture of respect for the fallen, as far as I am concerned.
We'll see if this was a one time thing - or perhaps he will meet with familes, ala the last POTUS.
I guess the real question is: would he have gone or has he already gone there without permission for a photo op?
I don't know what was in Obama's mind when he started this trip. No one but him knows for sure. The best I can hope for is that the whole episode becomes a learning experience for him. He needs to know that as President his words and actions have serious, profound consequences. At times he seems to forget what office he holds. It's past time he stops playing at President and starts being a real leader. He can't vote present for the next three years and he needs to learn that asap. A flag draped coffin is a stark reminder.
Fucking GHOUL!!!!
When you think that he can't sink any lower....