What is wrong with the American army?

Reference the war in Iraq. DK says we did not go there alone. That’s true, but one must consider that the USA led the charge and marshaled a coalition to go with them. Those who refused to go along with the invasion were branded. As it turned out, refusing to go along was the right decision.

Admitting that we make mistakes takes courage and is honorable. We have done many things right. Many believe that whatever we do is right and consider that as patriotic. I disagree. Speaking out against injustice is patriotic. Working to preserve what’s good about our country is patriotic. Being ready to defend our freedom is patriotic. Denying wrong doing or covering up our mistakes is not patriotic, but deceit and cowardice.

builder wrote:

Women in the u.s troops sent to Iraq have been raped. Raped by male officers on their side! wtf is wrong with the u.s?

Take a look at this video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFXQ0lOcLVw


They can't even protect the women in their own army. Forget about the civilians and lives in Iraq. Are you concerned about women you know that have been or still in Iraq? 1 in 3 women get are sexually abused. Sigh. The u.s is all messed up.

The topic has strayed. The discussion was about rape, now it seems to be about the Iraq war.

It seems to be about both, Shelagh. Pardon my ignorance, but who is "Russia Today," and what is their agenda?

Ann

Hi Ann,

This is the Russia Today website:

http://rt.com/

Thanks for the link.

Ann

Internet news is problematic--so is Fox News.

Here's the scoop on news. Television news is strictly for the ratings. Journalism no longer exists on television except for the occasional special. They, too, are suspect depending on their sponsors.

Some journalists that have left newspapers as newspapers decline have found a new home on the Internet. They do produce investigative reporting and factual news as it happens, without commentary.

The trick is finding the real news on the Internet, separate from the many opinions that are posted there without foundation. I don't know the answer. I do know that some reporters have received awards and honors, so it pays to find them and follow their reporting.

It's no secret that FOX and a few others are strictly there to slant the news against Democrats of any type. They will say that NPR and PBS do the same for the left. At least NPR and PBS don't have the whiney, hateful people giving the news and their stories appear (I'll give the right wing people "appear") to include more than one perspective.

I guess it's like going to church. People start with their political beliefs then find a news source that supports them. I approach church and news differently.

I gave up on all churches and found one full of people who were like me, wanting something spiritual but wanting choices about their beliefs. I gave up on my Republican party when it became so radical and full of bigotry and hate mongering; now, I'm an eclectic wanderer, embracing those ideas that seem right for today's global world and not narrow in focus.

Since birds of a feather flock together, my long-term friends are Republican and sing the praises of the Palins and the whiners of similar ilk. They hang onto their Fox news and their money and their corporate lifestyles with great fear of losing a whit of the excesses in which they live.

At least I have lost everything material already so I can be generous in spirit since I've nothing material for anyone to take.

DK,

You have a gift--you said it so well. Thanks!

I am watching a programme on the war in Iraq. It has interviews with men and women in the u.s army. It is very interesting and has given me a clearer picture of what had gone on over there. It shows lots of footage from the war. The soldiers that have survived the war, many have severe injuries. Some losing their limbs and have been replaced with artificial arms and legs. It is disturbing, but can't help think that, this is what happens in an invasion or being in war. Soldiers revealing that Iraqi civilians that were innocent were abused, hurt and killed. Children were whipped. And this was something that happened all over. Nothing has said yet in this programme about Iraqi women or u.s female soldiers being raped. I have made up my mind on whether such crimes had happened. It is truly disturbing.

These soldiers at least, have the honour to admit what happened, some having remorse or just telling what went on. A soldier that returned home injury free had hung himself. He had failed to deal with the heavy trauma of war. A soldier being interviewed who killed a woman (god knows how many women he killed), finds it hard to deal with this and admits no matter what he does now, it will never bring her back. I am writing this as I watch this. Some soldiers find it extremely hard to deal with the images in their heads of dead children. I didn't want to continue this topic, but watching this has given me more understanding. Some soldiers have said that it was survival. I do somehow understand. It was kill or be killed.

A soldier of high rank after being through around half his tour in Iraq, decided he could not continue his part in the war. He went back to the u.s and criticised and expressed his views on the war. He was discharged dishonourably, had his rank taken from him and was sentenced to a year in prison. When he was released, he became an activist. It is rare for a soldier to become an activist. His story is moving and I can't help giving him respect for his bravery. He clearly shows remorse and knows what is happening in Iraq. He finishes the interview and the programme with a sincere apology to people in Iraq and an alternative to soldiers, that there is a way out. Even if it means shame, or prison. That there can be greater freedom and peace. To finish my comment, we live in a strange world. Who would have thought from 9/11 would have a war that would be so destructive.

All wars are destructive, builder. The incidents you are reporting are identical to the situations soldiers faced during the Vietnam war. They happened during WWII, but there was more justification for taking up arms at that time, so more of the soldiers were able to come to terms with it all. This is what war is, and this is what it does to people. The symptoms you describe are those of PTSD, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

All wars are essentially evil, a part of humanity's dark side, but as I wrote in A Myth in Action:

Quote :

It is in that darkness that humanity finds the ability to assert and protect itself, its ability to take action and make decisions. Without these necessary attributes, people cannot take positive action. They become helpless victims of the uncontrolled aggression of others. One of the lessons that Murphy learned during the war was that there are positive values even in the greatest evil, and he came home to see that there was also great evil in what was purported to be the “world of light.” “War brings out the very best in a man,” he would say later. “You share everything, and you know that you can depend on the guy who stands shoulder to shoulder with you,"and again, “War taught me how to get along with people, not to be selfish. War is a pretty good course in public relations." Conversely, he pointed out that fear often brings out the worst. Murphy clearly understood a psychological truth. War itself is evil, but warrioring is as essential part of being human.

In Shakespeare's play, Henry V, the night before the Battle at Agincourt, Henry walked through the soldiers' camp in disguise, and listened to the soldiers talk about responsibility and justification. He understood the extreme responsibility he carried in giving the orders that would take those soldiers into action, and many to their death. It is an awesome responsibility - to have the power to send soldiers into battle. It is the soldier's job to obey those orders, and the trust - or lack of it - is an important factor in their ability to deal with the actions they take.

Audie Murphy was one of those soldiers who came home with PTSD. He never fully recovered from it.

There is a scene in the most current version of Robin Hood, Where King Richard, walking through the camp outside a castle being sieged, asks one of his archers, Robin Longstride, if God will approve of their actions. Robin tells him .No." He tells of a day when Richard ordered the death of hundreds of Muslim men, women, and children, and how the victims pitied the Crusaders, knowing that the act would leave them "Godless."

The Cherokee People had an interesting solution: The war chief was chosen by the women of the tribe. It kept things in balance.

We cannot survive without warriors. We need to honor them, and we need to see to it that the leaders making the decisions do not send them into battles without honorable cause.

Ann

What Ann said.

Ann

11/8/2010

I have always been against the Iraqi and Afghanistan war,
this photo I saw in USA today broke my heart, this American
soldier deserves a medal for help saving this child..

Cheers..Joe

Joe,

I am with you. Besides we are borrowing money to fight these wars. Why doesn't anyone care about that?

Borrowng billions to kill and be killed--something is haywire!

Yes. The u.s cannot sustain and keep funding these wars. I do understand that wars in the past are just as destructive. But is the war in Iraq and Afghanistan an endless pit? Past is past but still is important. In the present, the real reason for these wars is not easily understood. The people fighting in the war are just puppets, to serve the purpose of control and power.

So, we are back to the US being the bad guys? War is war. Past, present, future. Other countries around the world are involved as well, including the UK. I still don't understand why you insist on making the United States the villains.

Ann

... because we live in a blame culture, Ann. In the present climate, we have to salve our own consciences by puttting the blame on someone else. I bought into Tony Blair's rationale for war. I'm not a socialist and I didn't vote Labour, but I thought the reasons for war were just that -- reasonable. They were not. Worse still, there was no strategy for after the war had ended. It was a shambles and a complete disaster. The military won the war but the politicians lost it in every sense of the word. The troops should come home. NOW. If civil war breaks out it will be the fault of the politicians, not the military.

11/9/2010


Shelagh..

I agree , the minute the USA Military leaves ,
all hell will break loose and their will be a civil war in
both countries....Nobody wins and thousands will be
slaughtered..

Cheers..Joe

Shelagh,

A lot of people trusted their leaders about invading Iraq. You're right. Now that we know it was misplaced, we need to get out.

Ann

What's esp. galling is that Iraq isn't a "war" and never was. It was an invasion of a sovereign nation, and then became an occupation to keep the citizens from killing each other.

Bring the military home. Have them oversee works projects programs to rebuild our nation.
More jobs for us and a savngs of billions per month. No lives lost either.
This is my plan. Who will vote for me?

I was shocked when we went to war against Iraq considering the actual background of the terrorists. I was against it from the beginning, certain it was a ploy to regain the falling popularity of the president; vindicat his father; and save our claim to Iraq oil.

The fact that no one talks about the cost of war is because it was during the Republican administration that the budget deficit was allowed to skyrocket because the country was put in a state of fear and brainwashed into believing the former President Bush was single handedly preventing our shores from being invaded thus it was unpatriotic to say anything against any of his decisions regardless of bankrupting the U.S. My own brother blew his always calm cork at me for even suggesting we should not be in Iraq; he all but called me a traitor for even the suggestion. My nephew likewise believed the invasion was an act of God through former President Bush.

Now, we turn attention to immigration and the very needed and necessary health care reform as culprits; "saviors" from the financial debacle through their elimination, and turn the country purposefully against President Obama. Once more, I am appalled, but not surprised. Always on the backs of those least able to protest. Makes me ill.

We all know the war (invasion) was wrong. It was based on lies and a political agenda – oil. Failing to understand the mentality of the people was a greater error. The various religions factions in Iraq required a strong hand to keep them under control and Saddam Hussein did that, although in a ruthless manner. (Lebanon is a good example of religious factions fighting each other). Once it was discovered that Saddam didn’t have WMD’s, Bush tried to justify the war because of Saddam’s ruthless government and the number of his own people he had killed. Since the war, we find that the invasion caused more casualties than Saddam’s ruthless past, and they did it in a much shorter time span.
Now that Saddam is gone, and when the foreign troops leave, there will be fighting among the factions. I’m guessing that the west will try to install another strong man to provide control.
And around and around we go.

repost from elsewhere

the goblin showed, saying "...let me guess your thinking then, the army is in control of the situation here, it is answerable to the government, and government is duly elected by the people, thus democracy as we know it then, where the goal of democracy has been its propagation worldwide, in other words "america stands for democracy" then...", well at least that was what it was meant to be, continuing "...but no, amarica actually stands on finance, where financial influence is the key to understanding its foreign and domestic policy now, where democracy is commendable, permissible, and tolerated only until it elects something that is against the wishes of the builderberg, or whatever one chooses to call that vested interest that lurks behind those western democracies then...", in fact, orchestrated economic collapse was on the cards now, where the unanswerable fed prints money to crash level, and where war would serve and a distractive scapegoat here, so the big banks can buyout by the little ones, any reason why the workings, motivations, and results should differ from 1929 then, save in scale perhaps, oh and in subtlety of remaining in the shadows again perhaps

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

11/9/2010


Abe....


I agree with you 1000% We should get out and I mean now..


Cheers..Joe..