What is the attitude on the left? What are they really thinking? I have been arguing for years that they despise the military and they only pretend to care because they know they can't get elected if they tell the truth. Well i think william arkin is representative of most on the left and he spells it out clearly right HERE.
Normally i would reprint some of the article for you to read as a teaser, but this time i'll reprint one of the many responses that he received instead.
Mr. Arkin,I read with, great surprise, your article on the troops speaking out. I thought of a rather long missive to post, but I think concise facts might be more appropriate.
• Prior to the 2000 election, the unwritten rule was that former Presidents would not speak out publicly about current foreign policy. The reason being that to do so might send mixed signals to other countries, and undermine our foreign policy.• In the 1970's, troops returning from Vietnam were spit on, called baby killers, labeled as murderers and rapists. Our Military was demoralized, underfunded and ill-trained.• In the 1980's, The Military was built up, morale was very high, and the Soviet Union collapsed without the nuclear holocost those on the left claimed was imminent.• General Giap, Commander of the North Vietnamese Army and the Viet Cong, was interviewed by a Newsweek reporter. He told the reporter that after TET (1968), the Viet Cong were no longer usable, and the North Vietnamese Army would take years to rebuild, and would not be able to mount another offensive. The TET offensive of 1968 was an absolute failure for the North. They lost over 70,000 soldiers and Viet Cong. He stated that it was the protests in the United States that gave him hope. He stated he didn't have to win, just hold on longer than the American people. The South Vietnamese Government collapsed after the United States Congress cut off all funding. The United States Military won every single battle, but the media and the politicians lost the war.• January 1995. Then President Clinton was moving to deploy United States Forces to the Balkins. The United Nations forces had failed to stop the ethnic cleansing there, and the world watched. Much was made of the Republican controlled Congress that was holding funding until the President explained why he was committing U.S. troops for reasons that departed from prior policy. They wanted to know the objectives and the exit strategy. President Clinton stated "They will be home by Christmas". That was 1995. I served in Bosnia in 2001 and 2002. The last large number of troops was pulled out last year. 11 Christmas' had passed, no media uproar, no headlines of quagmire.• The policy prior to 2000, as a result of what happened with Vietnam, was that we should strongly debate the use of force up until we have boots on the ground. Once soldiers were in harms way, all should unite and give one message "We support our troops efforts to succeed, and we will stand behind them.
In a nutshell, citizens, politicians and the media, who are actively pushing for a withdrawal in Iraq, are giving hope to our enemies. I have heard far more outrage from those on the left regarding naked prisoners standing in front of Female soldiers than I have heard about videotaped beheadings of Americans. If you think Abu Grahb was worse than Nicholas Berg, you are really in need of help.I have served for 20 years in uniform. I hold a B.A. and held a strong GPA. I have buried more friends over the years than I care to remember. Good men who's lives were much more valuable than some of those whom they died protecting. The arrogance that people like yourself display is amazing. Sit behind your desk, write your columns. Thank God the people who risk thereTheir lives for the idea and freedoms that are our Nation, are not willing to risk our future. You are lucky you don't have to deal with what would be the results of your policy preferences. You can sit and type and there is always going to be someone who will stand up to defend you, maybe. You sir, are a coward and a disgrace.
Posted by: Kevin P. Bradley February 2, 2007 09:10 AM
8 comments:
On the Newsweek story on General Giap: it's not real. Never happened. Can't believe everything you read on wingnut sites. He didn't say it in his memoirs either, despite numerous claims.
speaking of wingnuts, there was no second shooter on the grassy noll. get over it.
Now i haven't read his memoirs, and i highly doubt that any maniac would ever admit outright that he was going to surrender. However the reviews that i've read on his books all indicate that he wasn't stupid enough to believe he could beat us militarily and knew he needed to wait us out.
Also, the fact remains that just like Iraq, we never lost a battle in vietnam.
Another FACT is that Tet was a desperate last ditch offensive by the north that was a devastating defeat for them and was portrayed very differently by the American media.
Finally, it's obvious that our current enemies are following the same playbook and hoping for the same result, and if our political elite are more worried about winning elections than winning the war as they were back then the enemy will get what they want.
On the Kennedy assassination: I doubt you know a damned thing about it, whereas I personally have spoken to someone involved in altering the autopsy material. So, I am not interested in your opinion.
As for Vietnam,you are right. Waiting us out was always the plan. Ho Chi Minh said that we would kill ten of his men for every one of ours killed, and in the end he would win, because we would leave. They couldn't defeat us but we couldn't defeat them either--not on their home ground. The alternative would have been to stay forever.
Gary what enquiring minds really want to know is who did the autopsy on the alien at area 51? whats that you say? he's still alive and now he lives in the white house? wow!
Anyway, we can argue vietnam all day but that's not the point of the post. You're focusing on one small part a response to an article from the washington post.
The author of the article is representative of the attitude of the elite left. The main stream media, the democrat party, academia etc. These 60's retreads who burned their bras and their draft cards spit on our soldiers when they came home and still despise the military to this day. These idiots who love castro wear che t-shirts and think America is the bad place.
Are you one of them? I hope not.
As for Arkin's column, I might not have put it in the same terms, but I understand his point. The soldiers in the military, if they are fighting for anything, are fighting for our right to criticise their mission and their Commander-in-Chief.
I doubt that Arkin is anti-military, given that he enlisted in the military in 1974.
I don't think they're fighting for you. More to the point, he (arking) doesn't think THEY (soldiers)should defend themselves or their mission against the criticism or to tell you you're an anti military pussy.
Many people have served and then turned by the way. Most famously j.kerry and a.gore. but that's neither here nor there.
I am not anti-military. My father fought in the second World War and I have a strong respect for the military, particulary the Marines.
Well you also said you understand arkins point. the man called the U.S. military MERCINARIES! His whole article is in response to the soldiers who spoke out against the biased media and he doesn't believe they should have a voice!
His disdain for our men and women in uniform is so obvious it's glaring and if you don't recognize it you need to re examine your own attitude.
Post a Comment