I would like to welcome Lieutenant C to the site.
He is stationed in Iraq. He has self-identified himself as a Republican, and has offered to answer questions, either here, or by email: rdcurrie@comcast.net.
Please remember he is an officer, and treat him with the utmost respect.
Ask him a question and he’ll try to respond when he has the chance. Bookmark this thread to make sure you get his responses.
Some other Iraqi blogs:
Hi, thanks for taking questions. Are you an enlisted soldier or are you from the Guard? And why and when did you join the military? Thanks again for your service.
Ohioan,
I am now an officer, I was enlisted in the US Marine Corps for 11 1/2 years, the Army Reserve before that and military school before that. I commissioned in 2003, as an officer in the California National Guard (one weekend a month, 365 days a year). I didn’t join the military it picked me. I found that I have been able to accomplish much, and even sucessfully maneuver throughout the political machine that has become the US Armed forces. I am now in my 17th year of service and I do look forward to retiring, and starting a new career, hopefully in the American political arena. My wife, is a registered member of the Green Party so she will most assuredly be happy when I hang up my uniform for the last time. After numerous deployments and missed holidays, and my first and in November 2nd anniversary. I will be happy to pass the torch on. Until then I serve.
all of your courage and dedication to up hold the Constitution of The United States. Please know and let your friends know that ALL AMERICANS SUPPORT OUR TROOPS. We Pray all of you come home safely. First question…How did you hear about the BoomanTribune….2. Do you guys have everything you need over there and are we over extending our troops? 3. Do you think we will ever be able to tell the Good guys from the Bad guys. 4. Based on your point of view..How long do you think this war will go on until “Mission is Accomplished” and Iraq is free of Bloodshed. Please let any Iraqi’s you come in contact with know we are truly sorry for this horrific situation and we can only hope Peace prevails sooner rather than later.
Please know and let your friends know that ALL AMERICANS SUPPORT OUR TROOPS
I support those troops reluctantly carrying out orders imposing American will on foreign soil, not those eager to spread American hegemony and plant another McDonalds abroad.
I support those troops who whistleblow on excesses and criminal acts by their peers, not those who excuse them, cover up for them, or call them “scapegoats”, saying they were “only following orders”.
I support those troops who obey and honor not only the letter but the spirit of the Geneva Conventions. I do not support those troops who do not.
I largely support the National Guard troops, who decided to serve of their country in an organization where they expected to provide disaster relief and protect the homeland, not be shipped off to project American hegemony on foreign land.
I largely do not support the Marines and other gung-ho professional soldiers who, out of all possible public service professions, chose the one whose primary mission is to kill and/or support the killing of others – knowing, as we all must, that, in each and every war, “just” or not, the primary people killed are innocent civilians.
I support those who understand that there were no Iraqis among the 9/11 hijackers, that there were no weapons of mass destruction on Iraqi soil, that there was no imminent threat to the West from Iraqi missiles, and that there is more than one way to defeat tyranny, and more than one way to manage the aftermath.
I do not support those who meet all criticism of our actions in Iraq with the mantra, “you think we were better off with Saddam Hussein in power?”
As a veteran myself, I resent attempts to stifle dissenting opinions and smother open discourse in an ALL CAPS SCREAM of patriotic fervor. As a pacifict who reached his position as the result of anguished personal experience with war, with occupation, with terrorism and the aftermath of violent conflict, I resent those who would hijack my loyalties and tell me who I should and should not support.
Let’s have an open, respectful conversation where all points of view are given due consideration and where people are not demonized for expressing free speech and having free thoughts, even if they contradict the prevailing group-think.
Being a humanist and an optimist, and having respect for Booman’s judgement, I assume a priori that Lieutenant C is one of the good guys. But for every L.C. on Booman, there are a thousand soldiers on freerepublic.com and a thousand more on littlegreenfootballs, foaming at the mouth in rabid support for our messianic president and wishing they could point their guns at me and my fellow bleedingheart liberuls.
I do not support Americans, enlisted or not, who do not support our Constitution or respect human life. With no draft, it is self-evident (and backed by public opinion research) that a significant majority of soldiers support the Bush Administration’s foreign policy, support the use of force to impose American will on foreign soil, that a signficiant majority of soldiers believe that the tens of thousands of Iraqi civilian casualties are “payback” for the thousands of Americans murdered on 9/11.
I do not support those people, no matter what uniform they wear, or what position they hold.
I support humanity and human values, and oppose war. And I am a patriotic American. So please, don’t speak for me or my fellow like-minded Americans.
Thanks.
in a different thread, I have responded to him in that thread. link for those interested.
This sentence disturbs me:
I largely do not support the Marines and other gung-ho professional soldiers who, out of all possible public service professions, chose the one whose primary mission is to kill and/or support the killing of others…
There is a suggestion here that “other public service professions” are available to people with only a high school education. Like garbage collecting, perhaps. Most volunteers in the military are hoping to live long enough to get a college education, maybe see the world and better themselves. It’s a risk they are willing to take. Think of all the people who are joining to get US citizenship for themselves and their families…
This may not be true of all commissioned officers but, many of them received their degrees thru ROTC scholarships. So, again, don’t assume that people have lots of alternatives.
Speaking for my husband, who enlisted in the Marines back in 1966, he wanted to get the hell out of Macon, GA and figured he was just as likely to get killed running moonshine, if he had stayed, as serving his country. Given his circumstances, I think he made the better choice at the time. He escaped from poverty and a life of crime and the Marines enabled him to become an educated gentleman who got to live in Vietnam, Japan and Germany.
I also object to your feeling that the Marines are somehow more dedicated to killing people than the Army or the Navy or the Air Force who, afterall, get to kill more people at a distance instead of engaging the enemy face-to-face.
Again, speaking for my husband, he regarded the Marines as being the elite branch of the military and as long as he was joining, why not become the very best warrior citizen he could be? The Marines have extremely high standards and their training in how-to-kill is the best and most likely guarantee of survival in a war zone.
Yes, my husband killed people in hot blood — and cold. But, he also helped many of the people he met in Vietnam to get out before the fall of Saigon. He learned their language and culture and still has great respect for the Mama-sans and Papa-sans who guided his interest in Buddhism and opened his limited redneck mind to a wider world view. He came out of the military radicalized and dedicated to peace like only someone who has fought for his life can.
😉
How did that happen? Yep, that was meant for galiel, no doubt about it.
1. There is a suggestion here that “other public service professions” are available to people with only a high school education. Like garbage collecting, perhaps.
Coast Guard. National Guard. Border Patrol. EMT. Firefighter. Forest Ranger. Police Officer. Peace Corps.
Myriad opportunities in Homeland Security. There are many, many ways to serve your country that don’t require a college degree (which, by the way, I don’t have either). None of those jobs have, as their primary, official mission, killing people. None of the jobs have, as a matter of historical record, the result of killing mostly innocent civilians tangential to the objective.
Oh, and by the way, garbage collector and other public service jobs. There is nothing wrong with doing the dirty work that you seem to look down your nose at, that keeps our society going. Is shooting dupleted uranium rounds or dropping cluster bombs or firing white phosphorus shells on civilian areas somehow more noble than garbage collection? That right there says more about the pathology of our warrior culture than anything I could say.
2. Most volunteers in the military are hoping to live long enough to get a college education, maybe see the world and better themselves. It’s a risk they are willing to take
And, in their hierarchy of values, killing people, primarily innocent civilians, ranks lower than getting a college education, seeing the world and/or bettering themselves.
You can’t avoid the fact that choosing warrior as your profession is a statement about individual values. Those are not values I share nor values I approve of nor values I believe are good for the human race. My opinion, yours clearly differs. But let’s be honest about one thing: the mission of the military is to kill, and in all wars everywhere, the majority of people killed are innocent civilians. If one chooses to do that, one should be responsible for that choice, and not try to evade it.
Incidentally, despite the skillful framing trap we have all been lured into, our military are not “volunteers”. Big Brothers are volunteers. AmeriCorps are volunteers. In small towns, firefighters are volunteers. Today’s American military employees are not volunteers. They are paid professionals. They chose, as their profession, to be trained to kill (or, to provide support services for those trained to kill to help them kill more efficiently). They choose, out of all the life choices they could make, to be trained to kill, and, if they are used precisely as they are trained, to be complicit in the killing mainly of innocent civilians. And they made a value judgement that that is worth the adventure, or the benefits. Because, you are right, the military’s own official statistics show that the overwhelming majority of today’s recruits do NOT join the military for patriotic reasons, but for self-serving reasons.
People who join the military today always have options, just like everyone else has options. Not every high school kid from a poor neighborhood joins the Army.
The fact that being trained to kill is an acceptable option, in order to get an education or see the world, is a choice I do not support. It is the fuel that powers our war engine and makes it possible for our political leaders to use our young men and women as killing machines.
I understand this is a personal and emotional issue for you (it is for me as well), but you seem to be reading my comments very, very carelessly, and putting words into my mouth that I did not say. I did not suggest the Marines were more culpable than the Army of Navy, I suggested that the professional military was more culpable than the National Guard, because, until this war, the NG were largely used for humanitarian efforts and homeland defense — its primary stated mission wasn’t to kill people and wage war. Until now.
Your final sentence seems to reinforce my point, rather than the argument you make upstream. As a result of your husband’s actual war experiences, “he came out of the military radicalized and dedicated to peace like only someone who has fought for his life can.”
So did I. Choosing to kill is the wrong choice. War is never the answer, and as long as we glorify those who choose it as a profession, as long as we are unwilling to confront the violence and aggression in our culture, as long as we are unwilling to face the warrior culture prevalent in military communities, that crank out ever more young men to be sent by old men to kill other young men and women on foreign soil, far from home, there will never be peace.
Hopefully, we can find a better way to teach that lesson than for our young people to learn it in the paddies of Vietnam or the dust of Iraq.
In most wars, there is an aggressor. A side who takes what is not his. I voluntered to assist in Humanitarian relief. I donated along with MAJ K (another officer with whom I serve) to the Indonesian relief. War to put it bluntly, and in laymens terms sucks. “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” -George Orwell
Here is something you may not want to hear. Without a warrior class, tyranny goes unchecked, and innocents die. Here is an honest question I pose to you who choses the olive branch. If I hit you would you strike back? If not then I the aggressor knows I own you. And I will strike again and again for whatever reason I feel just. No reason needed, beacuse I can, and you won’t do anuything.
A very simplistic argument. Agreed, but that is the world I live in, here I am not a politician, I am a soldier whose design and function is to find bad men, and destroy them. The sad fact to our lives is this warriors exist because they must exist. The fact that I can build explosives, shoot men, women, and children if need be from distances over a mile a way, I can kill with my bare hands, I know how to use and have used a knife, I know how to mix chemical compounds to make lethal gasses, and explosives. I can have and will do this without hesitation, these “skills” are tradecraft to me. Yet somehow it just doesn’t jive on a resume for a position as an Operations Manager. “well Mr Currie I see you have engaged targets impressive. But not exactly what we here at Brown and Krupen are looking for…” I do not accept your assertions that we are complicit and trained to kill innocent civillians. I have never targeted a civillian, I have never engaged a civillian and I have never killed, murdered, maimed, harrassed, or done anything save for feeding, giving food to and using my own body to protect them from sniper fire a civillian. At great risk to my own life. Are there bad people in the US military, without a doubt, do they do bad things yes. Yet I think (personal feeling here) that for one to generalize that we are simply here to kill, well that is inflamatory. I didn’t join for college money, I didn’t join for the benefits. I was young and dumb, but what I found was that I more readily identified with my fellow soldiers and marines than I did with the average American, who called us extremists, or murderers. I found that I am good at this profession. I have fired shots in anger, and everyone I engaged were bad people. As tragic as it is to take life, I am glad those men are gone. I want peace, I dare say more than you. I am here in B’dad, you are not. I want peace more than you. My wife is Israeli, her family has seen war as well. They want peace. Take an israeli baby, lay it next to a Jordanian, Egyptian, Palestinian, Iranian, Iraqi, and all Arab babies, let them grow up together without the influence of religion, what happens? Life long friends who can live in peace. However the world that we inherited still needs men like me and my fellow soldiers. Sorry… Choosing to kill is awful, but sometimes it is the only choice. I engage you in open and free spirited debate. I look forward to your reply. I thank you for your comments, you are obviously an educated and insightful individual. I look forward to the debate. Cheers…
Rusten Currie
I chooese to be a warrior…
You are right that there is an overriding reason we have a military – to defend ourselves against outside aggression. In an ideal force, that military would be strong enough to prevent all attacks and thus would not even need to use its lethal talents.
The more difficult issue is how to manage such force, if unemployed. How do you prevent people that have been trained to kill not to do so, and do you prevent an institution which has no one stronger than itself not to use this force against others, including against its own population? History shows that these temptations have often proved too much for some.
This is why you have military discipline, a code of honor, and in more recent times, civilian control over the military. All that you have posted here shows that you give all of these the utmost importance, and I fully respect that, as well as you personal commitment to the defense of your country.
I agree with galiel that soldiers do have a personal responsibility in having chosen a career where they are likely to be in a position to kill, but I also agree that it is a job that has to be done, and that with honor and discipline, the ugly stuff can be limited. That also means that the civilian authorities, and the population at large, must care about what their soldiers do in their name, and must exercise their authority to enforce that discipline and that honor.
It is certainly not patriotic, quite the opposite, the whitewash any abuse, and it is absolutely criminal of this administration to have sent soldiers in harm’s way (and to do harm) without a legitimate justification, and to have authorised – no, encouraged – dishonorable behavior.
You are right that there is an overriding reason we have a military – to defend ourselves against outside aggression. In an ideal force, that military would be strong enough to prevent all attacks and thus would not even need to use its lethal talents.
Historically, in fact, that has NOT been the primary mission of the US military. The primary actual, historic mission of the US military has been to serve as an instrument of US foreign policy, to extend and impose our will on the world. The Posse Comitatus act prohibits the US military from carrying out its mission on domestic soil.
Historically, in fact, the primary purpose of the National Guard (and, the various agencies now under the umbrella of Homeland Security) was to protect and defend the US homeland.
As Lieutenant C so accurately describes, his percieved role is to carry out the will of the President of the United States. Historically, he and his fellow soldiers have primarily carried out that will on foreign soil upon foreign citizens.
Curiously, we have somewhat inverted these two roles over the past twenty years, and most blatantly under the current administration, which is a dangerous and unprecedented trend.
I also agree that it is a job that has to be done, and that with honor and discipline, the ugly stuff can be limited.
The fact that few are willing to even entertain the question about whether it is, in fact, “a job that has to be done,” is both sad and telling.
Ironically, the historical figures we revere the most, from Buddha to Jesus to Gandhi to Martin Luther King, all rejected that assumption of the inevitability of war.
We give lip-service toward desiring a peaceful world where human conflict is resolved without war, yet we continue to squander a criminal proportion of our energy on waging it, on preparing to wage it, and on raising generation’s of young men to wage it.
I’m just saying that there are rational arguments against (y)our position, and thus no need to call you a trouble maker for holding what indeed appears to be a subversive opinion…
In that vein, I’d be curious to have your opinion on Kagan’s book on the US and Europe (of paradise and power), which deals with these issues, between countries.
I’m just saying that there are rational arguments against (y)our position
Indeed there are. Curiously, however, no one seems to be making them.
The best minds on our collective society of the one world theory cannot find an end tgo war. Should you have one, please share it. There are many arguments against your POV, you just don’t seem to be interested.
RDC
Um, what is this “one world theory” of which you speak?
Certainly nothing I have mentioned.
If there are? many arguments against my POV” (whatever you insist that it is despite what I actually say), then why don’t you simply make those counter-arguments?
Instead, you continue to talk about my motives, my interests, my intentions. You continue to attack the person while ignoring the message. I await your substantial rebuttal to my claims. Any of them. Just pick one and stay on topic.
1. You confuse pacifism with passivism. Many great and honored revolutions in modern history happened because people choose to exercise their will in ways other than total war and violence.
Do you honor Gandhi’s struggle less than the Gulf War, because it was conducted without killing tens of thousands of innocent civilians?
Do you honor Solidarity’s victories in Poland less than our carpet-bombing of Cambodia, because Solidarity did not leave a beautiful country looking like the surface of the moon?
Do you honor Fabio Castillo’s civic resistance in El Salvador less than our support for the Contras in Nicaragua?
Do you honor the peaceful breakup of Czechosolovakia less than the violent collapse of Yugoslavia?
Gandhi’s will defeated the most powerful army on earth, Martin Luther King’s love defeated bully-clubs, vicious dogs and bayonets, Nelson Mandela’s struggle for freedom was won only when he renounced his violent methods of the past.
Don’t give me that tired old cliche about reluctant warriors being the sole defense against a hostile world, and don’t pretend that the only solution to global problems is war. MOST conflicts today between world powers, whether national, economic or sectarian, are solved without war. That is considered progress.
Resorting to war is always a failure, no matter how “bad” you consider the enemy to be. Unless you glorify war itself as inherently noble and heroic and an achievement of human ingenuity to be applauded and emulated.
Most of the free world doesn’t think like that any more. Some in our society still do, more than most other free societies. No coincidence we wage more war than any other nation, no coincidence that we sell more arms – often to BOTH sides in violent conflicts – than all other nations in the world combined.
As long as people are eager to commit war, war will be committed.
I do not accept your assertions that we are complicit and trained to kill innocent civillians.
You see, here is where I start to lose patience, because you are clearly not interested in rational debate, clearly not interested in exploring truth, and clearly just spewing propagandistic slogans while pretending to be openminded.
I NEVER said, and never would say, that you are trained to kill innocent civilians.
That is a complete fiction you have created in order to avoid responding to a single actual argument I have made. You have this distorted straw man of what a bleeding-heart weak civilian is like, and you can’t even hear what I am saying through the simplistic ideological filter you have erected. It is disrespectful and dishonest.
What I stated, and can back up with endless statistics which you cannot even begin to refute, is that in every modern war, EVERY war, the majority of casualties have been innocent civilians.
Thus, when you chose a profession whose stated mission is to fight and win wars, you do so knowing that the majority of victims will NOT be the “bad guys”, but innocent civilians.
Incidentally, official US military doctrine, which I am sure you know, is that the way you win wars is by killing more people than the other side does.
I want peace, I dare say more than you.
Funny how quick you are to demonize me personally, first accusing me of seeking to “slander honorable Marines”, now accusing me of wanting peace less than you do.
I speak about ideas, and about actions, and you seek to personally defeat me, discredit me and dishonor me. I did not in any of my comments make any assumption about you personally, in fact I went out of my way to say I assume up front you are one of the good guys.
Clearly, I was mistaken. You are just here to impose your propaganda and shout down anyone who disagrees with you.
You, who get paid to wage war, tell me that you want peace more than I do. What monumental hubris.
and he didn’t realize he’d have you around. Give him a chance to clarify a little…
he didn’t realize he’d have you around.
Can you explain that remark?
you’re a pit-bull buddy.
Bye.
I have fallen in love with Galeil. Fours just don’t do you justice.
Why you don’t have a degree – in law – is way beyond my paygrade.
directed to the Lieutenant.
This is an open forum on a many-to-many medium. We are all engaged in discussion and debate on many issues.
You made a sweeping statement about “ALL AMERICANS” on a public forum. I am an American, and I objected to your statement.
I made my argument respectfully, specifically and comprehensively, in a comment that was completely on-topic and focused on the ideas without attacking the personalities.
In response, you abused the rating system to express your objection to my political opinion.
And now, you are criticizing the very act of posting a comment on this forum, because the content is not to your taste.
Instead, I invite you to respectfully argue my points if you disagree with them, or ignore them if you prefer. Attacking me because you don’t like my politics, and/or attempting to inhibit my ability to express my opinion is not an appropriate or constructive option.
Read my signature quote. It is apt in this case.
Thank you for your respect.
As Booman’s diary stated:“he has offered to answer questions either here or at this site” I asked HIM a question and you wrote a novel back to me. I started to read your novel and then realized you are a trouble maker and stopped. NOW I KNOW WHY YOU WERE BANNED AT DAILY KOS. You should be happy I didn’t give you a MEGA TROLL. 2-warning…Get out of my life.
Come on, Chamonix, this is indeed a many-to-many thread and galiel’s post in no way prevents Lieutenant C to respond, which he did below.
His points are radical and forcefully expressed, but they were polite and on topic. Disagree all you want with him, tell him his characterisation of the marines is unfair or exagerated (sp?) or naive, but don’t call him a trouble maker.
Having experienced this once already, I am saddened that his points are dismissed as trouble making. Please don’t thro him out like this, we will only make ourselves poorer..
Ladies and gentleman, I didn’t mean to casue such a “forceful” and divergent debate. I simply meant to offer my insights, and perspective from “boots on the ground” galiel believes passionately in what is posted, and one cannot fault that. I do not agree with what “he” said, but I will fight until my last breath to defend that very right for it to be said. If not for diversity of thought, and divergent opinions, then our system our way of life is lost. Having been a Marine for over a decade, that picture is completly inaccurate, one sided, and (seemingly) a blatant attempt to slander an honorable group of Americans. I’ll speak for all of my contemporaries, yes I feel comfortable in doing so. We serve so that others don’t have to, we serve so that our children won’t have to. Yet despite my total dissagreement of what galiel says (most of) I welcome it and encourage it. Even though I am having trouble with the big words, you know being a bloodthirsty murdering killer of innocents. 🙂 Pawn takes Knight…
Pax Romana,
Russ Currie
for this reply and for the one above.
I’ll reply longer to the other one above.
I do not agree with what “he” said, but I will fight until my last breath to defend that very right for it to be said.
With respect, you are not in Iraq in order to defend my freedom to express my opinions. You may think this war was justified, for a variety of reasons, or you may not, but let’s not pretend that it was about my freedon of speech.
If there is one constant in the acts of this administration since 9/11, including our actions in Iraq, it has been to inhibit, limit and increase the threats to my freedoms, and that of all Americans.
a blatant attempt to slander an honorable group of Americans.
How quickly we slide from fighting to the last breath for my right to express myself, to ad hominem attacks accusing me of slander. “An honorable group of Americans” is a phrase laden with emotionally-charged propagandistic demagoguery, but it means nothing.
People are honorable not because they don a uniform or wear a rank or shout a slogan, they are honorable based on their individual actions and expressions. There are good soldiers, and bad soldiers, good Marines and bad Marines. As I went to great pains to emphasize in my comments.
I look forward to intelligent, honest debate based on facts and focusing on issues – not to using patriotic sloganeering as weapons of mass confusion. You will find that such sloganeering holds little power among free-thinking people. Patriotism is the last refuge, after all.
I’ll speak for all of my contemporaries, yes I feel comfortable in doing so.
What qualifies you to speak on behalf of all of the hundreds of thousands of enlisted men and women? Am I qualified to speak on behalf of all men, because I am a man? Am I qualified to speak on behalf of all Americans, because I am an American? Am I qualified to speak on behalf of all civilians, because I am on, now?
Cliches like the ones you are throwing at me are designed to prevent open discussion, not to facilitate it. As long as you and others insist on tossing slogans back and forth, with sweeping generalizations and trying to make all people of a certain type right and all people of a certain type wrong, we will never be able to resolve our differences and work for constructive common cause.
Note how careful I was in my comment to emphasize that I don’t judge people simply based on the uniform they wear, or the rank they have, or the unit they belong to.
I judge them by their ideas, and the actions they take in pursuit of those ideas.
Let’s drop the slogans and have a conversation.
And let’s try to have a conversation with each other, rather than talking past each other at the straw men we would prefer to fight.
I am qualified to speak for the men and women who serve here because many of them cannot voice an opinion for fear of reprisal, I do not fear that. I share their experiences, and sacrifice. I understand their frustration and anger, I feel their feelingbs of betrayel, I feel their indifference. Every man woman and child has a right to speak their mind, I was doing just that. As were you. Patriotism, is a fall back when ideas and ability to express them run dry. I am a patriot, I don’t subscribe to slogans, to that end. I have nothing to prove to anyone. I chose my words carefully, I said an attempt to slander. Not slander, there is a subtle difference there. I simply did not agree with what you said Nor do I, but I respect your right to say it. This war is not about oil, this war may or may not be about freedom for the Iraqi people, so please enlighten me with you first hand account of what it is I am doing here. Every soldier serves at the pleasure of the task masters. That is the job, despite my personal feelings about it. So then what shall we discuss now?
So then what shall we discuss now?
You made statements about violent vs non-violent conflict resolution. I challenged those statements with counter-examples. You might choose to discuss that.
You made statements about tsunami relief, I refuted them with factual evidence. You might choose to discuss that.
You made statements about the motives of enlisted men. If you continue to insist that most soldiers enlist for patriotic reasons, to protect my freedom to be a bleeding heart liberal, I can present you with evidence from official military surveys, included in the annual report to the Secretary of Defense, proving that the overwhelming majority of people who enlist do not enlist for patriotic reasons. Or, you could just read the comments of the military wife here who defended her husband’s choice to enlist by stating (correctly), that most soldiers sign up for personal gain (college funds, learning a trade, seeing the world, adventure, shooting big guns). You could choose to discuss that.
You made statements about the responsibility of a warrior to obey orders, good or bad. I challenged the “just opeying order” defense. We could discuss that.
You made statements about how you are defending my freedom of speech, I made counter-arguments refuting that assertion. We could discuss that.
You made several incorrect restatements of my arguments, and we could discuss those. For example,
You claimed I said that you are being trained to kill innocents. I did not say that, and I refuted your mischaracterization. You could choose to apologize and withdraw it, defend it, or otherwise discuss it.
You claimed that you want peace more than I do. I challenged you to defend that remark. You could choose to withdraw it, defend it, or otherwise discuss it.
You could explain the strange tangent where you said that “The hatred that exists between muslims and jews is a war that goes back to the time of the 2nd great Caliph”, and explain what that has to do with your presence in Iraq and defending my free speech.
You stated that “facts are more than just statistics”. You could choose to explain that comment.
You stated that you see “facts that the media doesn’t show”, and that the sites I “probably visit” don’t tell them, and in general suggested that everyone else doesn’t know what they are talking about. You could explain that position.
In short, we can and should discuss all the things you have said, and all the response to them.
Or, you could choose to attack the messenger and parrot slogans.
Pick a topic, any topic, and we’re all happy to discuss it. You are the one talking up freedom of speech and then refusing to respond to substantial challenges.
“Oil has literally made foreign and security policy for decades.”
Bill Richardson, Secretary of Energy (1999)
I’m sorry, Lieutenant C, but here’s where I think you’re fooling yourself, “This war is not about oil“.
This war is absolutely about oil and U.S. dominance of oil producing regions. The reality of the situation is that we are approaching Peak Oil, if not there already, and the securement of stable oil supplies has become our top national security concern.
Here are a few articles to support my assertion:
http://www.fpif.org/pdf/gac/0305oil.pdf
http://www.mindfully.org/Energy/2004/Iraq-Peak-Oil6aug04.htm
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/GC03Dj02.html
The above list is by no stretch of the imagination all that is out there on this subject, but it is fairly representative of my argument.
I hope that I am one of the good-guys. If not, then history will undoutebly be my judge. I don’t wish to point my rifle at you, nor do I wish to stiffle your opinion. Quite the contrary, as my arguments strengtheny your resolve to your convictions; you arguments have the same resonating effect on me. I LOVE TO DEBATE!!! See it is possible to use the all-caps scream in a positve way. I support our consitution, with every fiber of my being. As I said I am not a flag waving patriot, but a patriot nonetheless, if you are a verteran, you have every right in the world as far asI am concerned to voice your opinion, loudly from the rooftops! Saddam was a jerk, period. I’m glad he’s gone. The troops who say “let’s kill em all” they tend to burn out and crumble under the pressure of combat. I have no tolerance for those who desire to kill for the sake of killing. The United States is an empire, we just don’t want to be. Someone has to lead, and many must follow. The idea of the “harmonic collective” is flawed based upon this sole premise human nature can’t work that way. Men are inherently selfish. I dissagree, there is only one way to confront tyranny overwhelming and undeniable force. I do agree that there is more than one way to manage the aftermath. There were no Iraqis on 9/11, there were mostly Saudi’s what is your point? I am a national guardsman, who is a little frustrated at our use in this war, but again not my call. I will do my duty (don’t get me wrong, I complain my tail off, just not infront of my soldiers) I don’t want to be in Iraq, but I’ve got a job to do. Not to worry, galiel, I question the morality of my tasks and orders, my consicience is my guide, and moral compass. Military might should be used as a last resort only, it got to that point, when the UN became impotent yet again, and action was taken. That is where I find myself. Daily seeking last second solutions to impossible problems. Surviving here one day at a time. Cheers, I eagerly await your response. Cheers…
Russ Currie
Thanks for serving. I would like to point out this:
As I said I am not a flag waving patriot, but a patriot nonetheless, if you are a verteran, you have every right in the world as far asI am concerned to voice your opinion, loudly from the rooftops!
As an American, by birthright I have every right in the world to voice my opinion loudly from the rooftops or the street corners whether a veteran or not.
I am a flag-waving patriot and proudly so.
Hey, I’m glad to hear your perspectives. It sounds like we wouldn’t agree on much as concerns domestic policy, but you seem like a basically decent person. I have heard the same kinds of things about the Iraqi kids from my brother in law (on the off chance you run into Specialist Joe El Koury, tell him his brother in law Alan says “hi”) and they have the ring of truth. I have very high hopes for the future of Iraq.
I hope there is something you can pass along to your fellow soldiers, a message I consider very important. Some of us are strong Democrats who didn’t vote for Bush and are deeply dismayed that he and other Republicans are in power, but we always supported going to war to liberate Iraq. Check out my interview in a Feb. 2003 article in the Washington Post for proof. (I’m the “avowed leftist”, Alan Thomas.) Please, tell your fellow soldiers that you don’t have to be against the war to be a Democrat!
Finally, though I do support the general mission, I want to emphasise that I don’t just blindly “support the troops” regardless of what they do. Abu Ghraib, as well as some of the “shoot first, ask questions later” treatment of Iraqi civilians, are very troubling to me.
Alan
Maverick Leftist
Chamonix,
I take your meaning, and thank you for your support, it is appreciated. I heard about Booman’s site by checking who looks at my site, and I recalled a friend of mine who is from Ohio mentioning it to me in one of his emails. We have much of what we need, and to avoid being misquoted I’ll leave it at that. As for overextended, well that is hard to say. There are troops who will complain about the deployment, a year is a long long time to be away only to return home for a year to 18 months then turn around and come right back. However it is the nature of the job. To serve at the pleasure of the President (Whomsoever it shall be, Dem or Repub). I hate to be in a third world nation where the people who are trying to kill me aren’t even from here. But to answer the question, no. We are tired, and overworked, but we haven’t reached the breaking point of overextension. The Cold War lasted for over 40 years, we won. The hatred that exists between muslims and jews is a war that goes back to the time of the 2nd great Caliph. The spike of Arab democracy is not a fluke, but time is the only way to tell and measure what we have done here. This war will (like the war on poverty, and drugs) will go on, and the children I am yet to have will be fighting it. Bummer yes, but human nature is predictable, and sadly so. Iraq, Baghdad will be in 10 -20 years what Beirut used to be. The average Iraqi on the street is awesome, their children are so loving and friendly. It is the children that make this place worth staying. Anyone who says otherwise has probably never left the comfort and safety of the US. That’s fine. I am not a brainwahsed automoton, nor am I am mindless killing machine. I see the progress that the media won’t show. I break bread with families who have nothing, and I help arrest Jihadists, and I do it because it is my duty, and if not me then who. I hate being here, but what’s a man to do? I have a job to do so thats that. Peace will happen in time. Always time. Thanks for the question, I hope I answered it.
Russ Currie
For responding to all of my questions in a respectful and dignified manner, if hope you can learn something from us here at BooTrib. And thank you Booman for hosting this discussion with the Lieutenant.
One can only respond by seconding your welcome and wishing him a safe time in Iraq and a good return home to friends and family.
I have a difficulty in writing further, although there are many questions that I should like to ask Lieutenant C. The obvious sincerity with which he he sees his role and purpose in Iraq as contained in his signature is not questioned. My issue is not with the people fulfilling the task out there but with the nature of the task and the legal and humanitarian basis on which it was begun.
With so many blogs by US soldiers now curtailed, with so many no go areas for press reporters in that country and very heavy censorship of, and/or spin on the news, how can we fairly ask and expect a frank exchange of views?
I suppose I would ask two questions:
1- I assume Lieutenant C now accepts that there were no WMD in Iraq or that it posed a ral and imminent danger. Is he aware, however, of how much evidence has now been revealed of the intention prior to 9/11 to invade Iraq and the nature of the discussions between the neocons and the oil industry to give effect to the desire to control international oil supplies. If so, how does this affect his vision of the purpose of the US and allied mission. Does he still believe the primary motivation was to bring democracy to that land and those people?
2- The announcement two days ago of the deaths of eighty insurgents has done little to inspire confidence that the opposition to his presence in Iraq is being overcome. It is rather like the drug enforcement officers who announce higher and higher intercepts of shipments, which prove to mark not their gaining control of the situation but simply the enormously increasing amounts entering the country.
With the bitter experience of Northern Ireland to support their views, UK commanders have a expressed a starkly different perception of the success being achieved in defeating the insurgents compared to that of the Pentagon. Does Lieutenant C believe that this is a war that can be won militarily?
Welshman, thanks for your comments. Allow me not to beat around the bush, despite what some on this thread call “Bush&co” there are unintended consequences here, one of which is low and behold the people of Iraq are stepping up and taking control of their destiny. In the last 96 houre there have been three seperate incidents of regular Iraqi civillians taking back their streets, granted the insta-justice dealt here would be considered vigilanteism in the US; we are not in the US. And it is a welcome an dalarmingly surprising trend. WMD, I am not going to speak to it. I have been in intelligence for nearly 15 years. A Middle Eastern analyst. I needn’t admit anything, because I never bought off on it. If I were President, I’d have just come out and said it. Saddam, you’re done, pack your bags. I am a skeptic by nature, do I believe that the primary motivation was to bring democracy to that land and those people? Doesn’t matter, unintended consequences are most often gotten from ill concieved intentions. It is above my pay grade to make such speculations. Sorry, I am not avoiding the question but I wasn’t sitting in the situation room when the President and his cabinet made their war plans. And about your question number 1, there are operational plans that are generated for dealing with many nations I suggest looking at Global Security.org. Or FAS.org. I just don’t see this overreaching conspiracy here. This country has literally no infrastructure. Any profits of oil we’d get here goes to eliminating Iraqs huge international debt. Sorry but I have been to the Green Zone, and seen how the leaders live, better but not seeing us US sucking oil out of Iraq. Maybe just maybe, the intent was to 86 Saddam and force a change that seems to be snowballing all over the Middle East. Not democracy as we know it, but changes are around every corner here. I am a believer that hope is the beginning of unhappiness, but there is cause for it here. Who would you rather have in control of the oil LOCs lines of communication the US or the Chineese? I loathe the oil industry, but it is a necessary evil for now. I’d buy a hybrid if they didn’t look so lame.
Todays military is not as it was 20 30 40 years ago, we have to be trigger pullers, diplomats, plumbers, and social workers. Often all in the same day. It is much harder for us today than say WWII, where the endstate was clear. Can we win militarily? No, it is being won this way, for every badguy we kill we put shoes on the feet of 5-10 children, we feed hungry families, and repair broken generators, and help families identify lost loved ones from the former regime. We win it one day, one person at a time. Not trying to sound cliche, but it is as I see it.
Regards,
Rusten Currie
I was wondering if you are aware that some(don’t know how many) Iraqi citizens are in communication with soldiers in Iraq, via cell phones and internet. Indeed some romances have been blooming.
I have a pen pal in Iraq and she is very friendly and in communication with quite a few soldiers stationed there and continued it even after that were returned home. Her friend is communicating (with soldiers) as well and works in the “green zone.”
The sad part to her and to the soldiers, it would appear, is that they can never meet in any way, can only talk over the phone. I am hoping that situation will change in the future and it will become possible for people to mingle.
Also I am wondering if the electricity and water problem is the same for the green zone, etc. as it is for the citizens there.
Would like to hear your thoughts on this.
Welcome. I don’t really have a question or anything. I’ve been reading your site (as much as I can… I have old eyes and black backgrounds with white type send them spinning around in my head … not a pretty sight!).
Anyway, thanks for offering to answer questions for us, and for giving your on the ground commentary of life in Iraq (on your blog). We have a few people on the site with friends and family members in Iraq, so I’m sure there will be some interesting conversations.
Keep safe.
Lieutenant C,
It’s a softball, but I’d love to know what the average day in Iraq is like for you. I think often we only hear the bad and the worst – it would be interesting to hear what the norm is…
Thanks,
Abbott
Booman, you write “Please remember he is an officer and treat him with the utmost respect”.
I am sure he is both an officer and gentleman – but he gets my respect for the service he is giving, irrespective of rank 🙂
I struggled with how to structure that sentence. I don’t mean to imply that only officers deserve respect. Only that, I hope people show the appropriate respect due to an officer in day-to-day life.
but if he gets out of line, I’ve got 0’s and a mean pea-shooter and I’m not afraid to use em! 😉
e pluribus unum!
Lt. C. How fare the Iraqi people in your area? Do you have at least some Iraqi support at street level? I read about the USMC medical teams working in Afghanistan, but we don’t hear much about civil affairs over here. I know you can’t discuss ops, but in general, are you getting what you need to do your job?
Nobody here envy’s your task. I think everyone here understands the difficulty of being between Iraq & a hard place. Keep ’em flyin.
It is good to have you. Hopefully, you will find this a community that tries to evaluate the merits of an argument without resorting to knee-jerk dismissals based on party affiliation or other polarizing labels.
Please remember he is an officer, and treat him with the utmost respect.
I am sure you are both an officer and a gentleman, but, with all respect to Booman, since I’m a civilian, in a nation governed by a civilian government, I will grant you exactly the same respect due to every citizen of this nation, and to every enlisted man or woman, regardless of rank. No more, and no less.
Your ideas will have to stand on their own 🙂
Welcome aboard.
e pluribus unum!
Greetings, and thank you for your thoughtful comments and questions. I’ll answer them all, some will obviously take more time than others. Yet I will answer them as quickly as I can, I give you my word on that.
Welcome, Lt…when you get a chance, can you give us a general idea of your role/duties in Iraq?
“Please remember he is an officer, and treat him with the utmost respect.”
as if he was enlisted and deserved less respect?
I’m sorry – that’s not going to work for me. As an officer, and judging by his writing, the Lieutenant is educated, capable of reason and recognizing truth… probably more so than the 17-20 yr old kids that signed up because they needed a job….
this officer still needs to earn my respect. so far, I’m sorry, but he’s shown himself to be a willful tool of the neocons. And attitudes like his harm the country I love. Please don’t ask me to respect that.
here are some questions for the Lieutenant. I hope he doesn’t cop out with another “that’s above my paygrade” comment. Like it or not, Lieutenant, you are a citizen of this country. You, as a citizen, should be a part of the vigorous debate that strengthens our republic.
So here ya go:
As an aside: don’t you think it would have cost a lot less in terms of both guns and butter if we had let UN Inspection teams do their job? If the US had undeniable proof that WMD existed, if there really was “no doubt”, why didn’t we tell Hans Blix where they were located? We controlled the airspace over Iraq – we could have easily paid a surprise visit to any suspected WMD location. If Saddam continued to cat and mouse us, we could’ve dropped a daisycutter on the installation. He’d learn pretty damned quickly.
You see, this in particular, is disturbing. Because if we accept your premise – that the world is a better place as a result of Saddam’s departure, ergo war=good war – well, we’d certainly have to ignore this inconvenient fact.
Sorry Lieutenant – but I think you have allowed your political ideology to trump common sense and yes, your patriotism. You are fighting for George Bush. You aren’t fighting for your country. (I will allow that you are also fighting for other reasons – your brothers in arms, etc – I was a Marine (enlisted) for four years…)
Wow, such passion, what do you do surely with the knowledge you have abot what goes on in this world you are a congressional staffer, maybe a scientist. Perhaps, an activist? To what truth do you speak? It seems that we are not reading from the same book. I won’t use the excuse it’s above my paygrade, how about this. There are things I can control and things I can’t those that I can’t I don’t waste time dwelling on. Did he have WMD, don’t know, are they here, I haven’t seen any, is there a god, never me him. one can be mad as hell about the whole issue, or simplu effect change where possible. Common sense, I’ve only met the VP, not Mr Bush. I am not fighting for him. I am a soldier I fight where I am told, and win where I fight. That is my job. let me get this straight you are comparing us to Nazis, and the japanese of WWII? Is that correct. Wow, I don’t know how to respond to that. Why not Iran, Syria, Columbia, North Korea, hell Vietnam for that matter, let’s settle that one once and for all as well. The elected President of these United States dictates foreign policy, and his policy dictates me to be here. Like it or not (I’d rather be in my home in Venice Beach with my wife not 10000 miles from reason.) Oh, have you ever worked for the UN? I have they are quite UN necessary, and impotent to do much other than pass resolutions as useless as our unimforced gun laws. I guess I am a willful tool of the neocons. I haven’t been called a tool in quite some time, thanks laughter is scarce around here. Saddam is a jerk, and your premise is false I never said war is good. Nor do I belive that, ergo anything. I think that we will leave Iraq, when the time is right, did I support invading Iraq, no. Many in the military said it was a bad idea, but the order came to go and we did what we get paid to do. Did the President lie, I don’t know. I have never been able to ask him. I have my personal opinion about it, but it won’t see me get home any sooner. The military had to track down the art (as much as we could) from the museum, not exactly our job. Protecting the ministry of oil, is vital to the infrastructure here, which is virtually non-existant. yes we will eventually leave IZ, and I can’t wait to, but until then… So when do you plan on running for office to help bring about changes to these sweeping injustices? I plan on running in Feb 06. I think the old paradigm love it or leave it is quite lame, I love my country, and I am not to concerend about earning your respect. No offense, Mike, I am not nearly as bitter as you. But I get and I hear LC what you are saying, but I am not ready to call it quits and say gosh we are acting like Nazis. Man, that was harsh. But I suppose I have a thick enough skin for it.
RDC
I guess it is my turn to ask a question.
Are your soldiers worried about the health effects of depleted uranium?
I’d like to make a point on the comparisons to nazis and the Japanese imperial army.
There is a thing called Godwin’s Law. Everyone should read about it.
What the Nazis did is so horrible that it kills discourse to compare anyone to them, and the larger point gets lost.
In this context, the question is this:
We invaded another country because they were harboring terrorists, not-complying with UN resolutions, lying about their WMD programs, and supposedly threatening their neighbors. We have now killed tens of thousands of people who would otherwise be alive. And almost none of the reasons we gave for doing this turned out to be true.
We can still make lemonade out these lemons. But it is difficult to support the effort in light of Rumsfeld’s complicity in the widespread torture of detainees, including over two dozen deaths.
Unless Rumsfeld is frog-marched out of the Pentagon in shackles, the comparison to National Socialists will only grow, not only here but abroad. It is a serious problem that Rummy has not been fired, at a minimum, which even Tom Friedman pointed out in his latest column.
I know Rummy is your boss, so I don’t expect you to have much to say on the matter, and that is perfectly fine.
But we need to be honest about how ugly our campaign against terror has become, and just how deeply criminal our violations of the Geneva Conventions and UN Conventions Against Torture have become.
Perhaps the discussion would flow more smoothly if you actually answered a question I asked. For a person that likes debate, you sure do seem to do your best to avoid clear and concise answers when challenged.
One by one, if you like:
As an aside: don’t you think it would have cost a lot less in terms of both guns and butter if we had let UN Inspection teams do their job? If the US had undeniable proof that WMD existed, if there really was “no doubt”, why didn’t we tell Hans Blix where they were located? We controlled the airspace over Iraq – we could have easily paid a surprise visit to any suspected WMD location. If Saddam continued to cat and mouse us, we could’ve dropped a daisycutter on the installation. He’d learn pretty damned quickly.
And, uhm… regarding the toothless UN… well, one way it got to be that way is our country’s leadership. We are the ones that refuse to participate in Kyoto, the World Court, international environmental treaties, etc. I’m not saying it is all our fault – there have been plenty of bad actors along the way – but we bear a certain burden of blame. Further, it’s done more good than harm throughout its existence. Korea would be a Chinese province without the UN, for example. Finally, to quote one of your leaders, “you go to war with the army you have”… If the UN is what we have, we should be doing what we can to make it better – not undermining it at every turn…
I should update that comment at the top about ‘respect’ because it is confusing people.
First, I don’t know about everyone else, but when I meet an officer in the flesh, I show him respect.
Second, I do not mean to imply that officers deserve respect and other soldiers do not.
Third, Lt. C is our guest, and a resource for what life is like in Iraq, what the armed forces need, how they see our progess going, etc.
Taken all together, I am merely asking that people treat him respectfully, and if you have a point of disagreement, to state it tactfully.
Sorry Booman – I should have read the entire thread before I posted. I got inspired when I saw the Lt. avoiding galiels arguments. Once I posted, I noticed that many others had made similar points.
also – I was enlisted in the Marines and saw more thna one officer that was just a complete schmo… I’ve come to believe that everyone gts a default level of respect to begin with and then my esteem for them rises or declines based upon subsequent events. Unfortunately it seem that with this Lt. we have a Rush Limbaugh acolyte that has never had an original thought of his own. His loyalty to the Republican party has defeated his ability to reason soundly. For that reason his responses to galiel and me have been vacuous and without any redeeming quality. I was disappointed.
Booman, I applaud your effort to make this a forum in which we may have reasoned discussion with people that may see the world through a different prism than ourselves. Unfortunately, I’ve come to believe that this choice of foil is wasted, except to the extent that he has been a perfect example of cognitive dissonance in the flesh.
I’ve come to believe that we have much to learn from the psychiatrists that study mass hysteria and other group psychological events. I truly believe that a significant portion of US society has been brainwashed by the republican right. It is almost a mind-control type of thing. We confront them with irrefutable facts and they invariably accuse us of “hating america” or some other such nonsense like finding fault with a perfectly valid comparison – I only compared the fact that in waging wars of aggression, we are similar. I never said anything about holocaust…
I’d add to the post of yours below also Boo… The propoganda that is happening in our country rivals that of Nazi Germany. We are using it to achieve different ends, but the extent and effectivness of its use are similar.
If there was a war in the land of Wingnuttery, and the only person we could find on the scene was Rush Limbaugh, would we waste our time arguing with Rush over the merits of the war, or would we ask him what he sees, hears and has to report?
Lt. C told us up front he was a Republican. We may have a problem understanding why he is a Republican, but there are more important things to discuss than his politics.
And I think he has an interest in what we have to say too. I don’t sense he is being dogmatic in his views. He is trying to tell us where he is coming from.
You’re right: it’s inconsistent to invade Iraq, and stay out of those other places. I for one would be happy to see us get militarily involved in all those places.
Alan
Maverick Leftist
Lt. C, it is an honor that you are communicating with us. Thank you.
My brother, cousin, and uncle served in Vietnam. My uncle also served in Korea, and retired from the Army as a Colonel. My brother was in Army intelligence and learned fluent Vietnamese at the Monterey Language School before deploying to Vietnam and working in interrogations. My cousin was an officer in the infantry, and the story of a terrible helicopter accident in which he watched his buddies drown can be found on the Internet.
My brother has five sons. My cousin, who died three years ago of cancer, had two sons and a daughter. My uncle has one son and three grandsons and two granddaughters.
I can tell you that some of my relatives are reluctant to allow their children to get into the military because they’re so worried about their kids getting killed in unnecessary conflicts.
What would you tell their children and grandchildren? Should they enlist? (I have no agenda in asking you. I am curious what you think.)
Thanks to BooMan for this site & starting this dialogue..
Hello Lieutenant C! Thank you for your service. My question is about the lingering effects of combat and PTSD issues. I know there will be many soldiers who have either full on PTSD or symptoms of it, which I see as a normal & expected human response to this kind of intense situation. But what I would like to know about is whether the military (does this go through veterans’ hospitals?) currently provides adequate resources to help soldiers returning from Iraq deal with this and to gradually reintegrate into civilian life, and whether National Guard members are also being looked after – because if many suffering from PTSD go untreated it will have such a serious long term effect on soldiers, their families, and the society at large.
I have read your posts/responses with great interest, because I am a firm believer in trying to get as much source information as possible before making decisions, and it is quite difficult to get accurate information out of Iraq.
I have to tell you, I am having trouble in a couple of areas. I would like to explore one of them here, and perhaps come back to the others in subsequent discussions.
First, the chronology of your service, when analyzed against your stated experiences.
If I understand it correctly from the timelines that you have presented, your seventeen years of service commenced in 1988, first in the Army Reserve, then the USMC starting in 1992 or 1993 and lasting for 11.5 years, until you switched to the CA National Guard and were commissioned in 2003. You further indicate that you have been an intelligence analyst for nearly 15 years, which would stretch back to 1990, when you were in your second year of service when you were still in the Army Reserve, and continuing until the present.
Is that accurate?
If so, could you give a little more detail about your training and experiences that you describe above, specifically relating to weapons/explosives training that you have received, and second, your use of this training. I am having great difficulty understanding why any of the branches in which you have served would train an intelligence specialist/analyst to be able to hit a target at “distances over a mile away”, when such skills are extremely specialized in any branch of the military that I am familiar with. Could you also provide a description of the weapon and sighting equipment used in such a situation?
I would also be interested in the level of training you have received in unarmed defense and that with a knife.
As concerns utilization of your training, could you relate the circumstances as to when and where you used a knife and lethal agents/explosives in combat, which your post above indicates that you have done?
In some later posts, I would like to explore your thoughts on what happens when an innocent is killed, accidentally or intentionally, as a follow up to your description of the positive aspects of the humanitarian activities that you describe above, so perhaps you can be thinking about that issue.
Entered USAR in 1988, USMC in 1992, got off of active duty in 2000, left USMCR in 2002, rejoined USAR in 2002 transfered to Cal Guard in late 2002 commissioned in 2003. Former infantry, Cross trained with Intel, work in and with sniper teams, 3rd man, water boy and intel gathering. (former boss of mine read the book Vortex) and liked the idea of an intel guy with the sniper teams. To work with/on a team one needs to know the whole function/job. I have knowledge of how to use a knife, and have done so in self defense, I have cross trained with demo, and have set charges for breeching, cratering, and general clearing of obstacles. I recieved traingin in the USMC in unarmed self defense, and survival. I have also recieved combatives training in the Army, I practiced Aikido, and Karate and knife fighting. (not rambo, just small guy who lives in a world where most of the bad guys are bigger than I am).
Innocents dying is tragic, but sometimes despite our best efforts to the contrary unavoidable. We render immediate aid if need be, or possible and ensure that they recieve the best care we can get for them. The weapons range from M-14, M16A4 with scope, M4 Carbine w/optics, M-24 w/ x10 power mil-dot scope. familiarization with numerous weps used by badguys. Pistols and chopsticks. My role now, not grunt guy, I ride a desk, the infantry game is for much younger and daring guys than myself. Does this help?
I am glad to welcome Lieutenant C to the site and hope you will continue to post diaries here.
It wouldn’t even matter if I completely disagreed with him (which I don’t) but we have to have very divergent viewpoints on any subject to make people think and meet on common ground.
Seeing, reading and hearing wildly diverse viewpoints is the only way to critical thinking and real progress.
Greetings,
I’d like to apoligize to galiel for snapping at him, to thank him for his questions which I will answer, but however I am behind in my homework for grad school (Thesis option International Relations, Norwich Univ) and I have to catch up on much neglected paper work. I’d like to say this if I may. I do have my own opinions, about the President, the deficit, our invilvement in the Middle-East, President Bush’s cabinet, but I am an officer, and as I said I am not censored I am monitored. I must choose what I say with discretion, and care. AS I said, I am not overly concerned with the reprecussions of my opinions, I just don’t want to lose this outlet. I do have my opinion about as you say the President “lying” to the American public, but understand here I am not a provate citizen. It is not a cope out, so please don’t think that is what I am doing. And for future reference please limit questions of me to my pay grade, and what one could reasonably assume I’d have knowledge of. I do not make foreign policy, therefore I cannot speak to it. I have never been to Abu Garad, so I cannot speak to torture of detainees there. I am a Republican, yet I am not in a position to speak to what the right side of the isle is doing at this moment. I appreciate your emails, and I will continue to answer questions that pertain to what it is I am doing here. If you want to discuss politics, well I’ll be home in a week, I’ll be able to voice an opinion at that time. I am what is called a mustang officer or one who came up from the ranks, so to address the comments about “respect” well, I to have seen my share of officers that to put it bluntly, serve because they could get a job chewing gum in the civillian world, that being said, speak to me in any tone you wish. You can call me Russ. TIme is tugging at me, more to follow…
Russ
Greetings,
I’d like to apologize to galiel for snapping at him, to thank him for his questions which I will answer, however I am behind in my homework for grad school (Thesis option International Relations, Norwich Univ) and I have to catch up on much neglected paper work. I’d like to say this if I may. I do have my own opinions, about the President, the deficit, our involvement in the Middle-East, President Bush’s cabinet, but I am an officer, and as I said I am not censored I am monitored. I must choose what I say with discretion, and care. AS I said, I am not overly concerned with the reprecussions of my opinions, I just don’t want to lose this outlet. I do have my opinion about as you say the President “lying” to the American public, but understand here I am not a private citizen. It is not a cop out, so please don’t think that is what I am doing. And for future reference please limit questions of me to my pay grade, and what one could reasonably assume I’d have knowledge of. I do not make foreign policy, therefore I cannot/will not speak to it (in this medium). I have never been to Abu Garad, so I cannot speak to torture of detainees there (I do perform questioning of suspects, and have never laid a hand on them not because Abu Garab, but because by law I am not authorized to but moreover it’s immoral to torture and degrade a fellow human. Even if he is an evil SOB). I am a Republican, yet I am not in a position to speak to what the right(refering to a seating arrangement not right or wrong) side of the isle is doing at this moment. I appreciate your emails, and I will continue to answer questions that pertain to what it is I am doing here. If you want to discuss politics, well I’ll be home in a week, I’ll be able to voice an opinion at that time. I am what is called a mustang officer or one who came up from the ranks, so to address the comments about “respect” well, I to have seen my share of officers that to put it bluntly, serve because they could get a job chewing gum in the civillian world, that being said, speak to me in any tone you wish. You can call me Russ. TIme is tugging at me, more to follow…
Russ
Russ,
I am easily frustrated. Be that as it may, I appreciate you coming around these parts. I wish it wasn’t hostile territory for you – I know you’ve got enough of that on your hands over there – but, as you can see, some of us are really ticked off about what we see as a continuing boondoggle of a war.
As I said, I served 4 years in the Marines. I remember Keller, Toia and Sopko… to me, “the troops” have names… they were great guys to have as friends – as brothers… just kids doing their level best to get through life. Most of them must be done with their service now – I joined in ’85 – but I know there are hundreds of thousands of them just like we were serving (probably under your command)…
so yeah… 1500 dead and 15,000 injured raises some hackles in my household. I don’t believe this is a “good war”. I don’t believe this country has treated the troops with the respect they deserve. Instead of making deliberate decisions about the necessity of war, people slap a “support the troops” stickers on their SUV and proceed to forget about them… meanwhile, their fuel consumption excacerbates the geopolitical dynamic that is the real reason behind this folly.
Anyway, I’m ranting. I didn’t want to do that. What I wanted to do was make some sort of peace. I want you back alive – with all of your men. I love you guys.
Godspeed.
Mike,
I appreciate your words, and thank you for clarifying your feelings. I know these are hostile waters, but I didn’t want to come in here as anything other than what I am, I didn’t come looking to argue about policy, or the war. However I do realize that when I did so I had a huge “shoot here” painted on my chest. I guess I represent what many of you are most angry about. A war you do not believe in, support, or tolerate. A war propagated by a government you detest. Rather a side of said government, you detest. Hey, I feel you man, I am in a National Guard unit, 1 weekend a month, and apparently 365 days a year. That however is another story. I really miss being a Marine, but I am an officer here and now. I love my troops, they are all pretty decent guys dealing with this (**!!&!&!) situation. I really wasn’t taking any of the posts to personally, I know that I am a symbol here of what angers many of you so I took it with a grain of salt. So, thanks. Again I appreciate it. I am not going to tuck my tail between my legs over a divergence of opinions. Some of the questions I’ll completely ignore (you know who you are), others asked I’ll do my damndest to answer. I’m not easily bullied or intimidated, I appreciate the fire at which you all express yourselves. But I simply don’t have the time to discuss National Policy, or how much some of the posters hate President Bush. Not really my lane to criticize W. Although if I were President for a day, I’d need about a billion more hours in that day to undo, some of what has been done.
Pax Americana,
Russ
Yeah – i think I missed the point of having you here at first. I was (am) more interested in the politics and poicy of this war than the actual war itself – I’m more interested in how you reconcile your political beliefs with the fact that the leaders of your political party have, in my view (and in fact), shortchanged you guys after putting you folks in a position that, well, I dunno – I can just say that I don’t think you should have ever been put there…
So yeah, I’m more interested in all of that than war tactics, history or weaponry. As a former Marine, all of that crap is mundane to me – though the war technologies have changed exponentially since I was in…
Anyway, I don’t like that you can’t have a political discussion – it’s just one more thing for me to despise about this administration – you can bet that you were more free to speak under the Clinton presidency… Hell, under Clinton a general got away with calling him a draft dodging pot smoking skirt chaser… lol… I dare ya to say that about Bush – ok, no i don’t…
anyway, good luck, man. Hope you enjoy your upcoming leave.
Hi Lieutenant,
I have one question:
Why did you chose to put as an epigraph on your blog a quotation of Heinz Guderian
, a nazi general close to Adolf Hitler?
Heinz Guderian, as Rommel, were not Nazi’s they were Wermacht, there is a distincttion between the two. They were on the losing side of a horrible war. However, Erwin Rommel is credited with a stature of greatness (in military circles) that if it were not for Heinz Guderian, Rommel would never have achieved. The man that was Heinz Guderian was a warrior, and a decent human being, he never tolerated murder in his formations, and dissobeyed many orders to execute POWs. His side, was wrong. His side was damned evil. The Nazis commited horrific crimes against humanity. As did the Japanese, as did the Italians, as did we and the Britons. In WWII there was no end save for victory. So, my admiration for Guderian is not based on ideology, but the man himself, and his “genious” in his profession. I hope that clarifies the seeming contradiction, that irony has not been lost on me. My wife an Israeli immagrant has pointed this out to me on numerous occassions.
I’m sorry, but I don’t buy the “clean Wermacht” versus “dirty Nazis” stuff. And even less when it comes to Guderian.
Guderian was a high ranking member of the Nazi Party. Unlike Rommel, he was not involved in the plot against Adolf Hitler. In fact, after the failed assasination of the dictator on the 21st July 1944, Rommel was forced to commit suicide, whereas Guderian was made Chief of Army Staff to carry out a purge of the German Army.
As a result, Guderian demanded the resignation of any officer who did not fully support the ideals of the Nazi Party and sat on the Army Court of Honour that expelled hundreds of officers suspected of being opposed to the policies of Adolf Hitler. This removed them from court martial jurisdiction and turned them over the National Socialist People Court, resulting in hundreds of death sentences by hanging.
Also, in September 1944, Heinz Guderian proposed the formation of the Volkssturm militia gathering all German males between the ages of 16 and 60 (those who were not already members of the German Armed Forces) under the authority of the Nazi Party (not the military).
Even if it was a stormy relationship, Guderian had a great affection for Hitler, who made his dream – a large Panzerwaffe – come true. He stated in 1950, that Hitler wanted only the best for Germany, though he made “some mistakes”.
It is impossible to separate the Wehrmacht, the Holocaust and so many war crimes. The high ranking officers of the Wehrmacht were no knights in shining armor, but lifelong trained soldiers who sacrificed their conscience and honor. And the Wermacht troops, as well as the SS, were involved in crimes against Humanity all over Europe.
Ok, firstly, Heinz Guderian was not a member of the Nazi Party. He was a favorite commander of Hitler becasue of his overwhelming tactical successes. He was once fired in 1941 for arguing with Hitler. He assaumed high command after the attempt on Hitlers life. He purged bad people as well as some good people. I am not justifying that, Rommel’s plans saw thousands of allied soldiers killed just as Guderian’s plans did, I am not justifying that. For example, the attack on Pearl Harbor was brilliant, am I saying yeah Japan, you showed us. No I am not, the attack on 9/11 was tactically executed with ruthless audacity, I as a military man understand the detailed planning involved in that from a security stand point and from a operations stand point. The military has long said that kind of attack was both possible and probable.
So, I can appreciate the brilliance of the man, and not support his actions, or party affiliation. In 1945 when he argued with Hitler to sue for peace and end the war he was again fired. When I was younger and in military school I had admired his tactical wizzardry, as well as Rommel’s they were of the stuff of ledgends. So you can be sorry if you want. I’ve been to Germany and actually met with members of his family, there no doubt that Germans in WWII were complicit by the very nature of being German. Rommel wasn’t involved in the plot, he had knowledge of it and was mentioned by name in documents as a replacement for Hitler, that is what sealed his fate. The Volkstrum was a last ditch effort to replenish the anhiliated divisions from the Ardennes and the Eastern front. They were an amagamation of teh Hitler Jungen, and a mandate to have no less than 14 divisions to defend Germany against invasion (the inevitable fall of). By the very nature of commanding an entire German Army, he was wrong in the broader sense. I guess what I am trying to say is that in court, he was not found guilty of war crimes, thus not found to be in bed per se with the rest of the regime. But, hey it seems that no matter what thoughts I express here I am wrong, so as they say here in B’dad Inshallah…God’s will.
got off but it is still controversial. I enjoyed reading his memoirs. Panzer Leader is a treat. I am just rereading ‘Stalingrad’ by Anthony Beevor, and it has a lot of material on Guderain’s unsuccessful march on southern Moscow.
I don’t envy those German officers who had to make a choice whether or not to obey Hitler’s immoral and innane orders, while worrying about the consequences of being overrun by the Soviets.
Guderain should have refused to serve Hitler. He should have joined the plot to kill him. But those were complicated times.
In these complicated times, many people (including Germans) chose to resist, putting their lives in danger to save their consciences…
And definitely, Guderian was a member of the nazi party. And the Wehrmacht was deeply involved in the nazi regime.
Guderain was a moral failure. No question.
It’s wonderful to meet you. Please know that you are in my daily prayers and I await the safe return home of you and all your fellow troops.
Not much to ask – I just wanted to pass on my thanks and my prayers. The one question I do have: is there anything we can send to you? Do you have a company of soldiers with you that would benefit from any care packages we can send? If there is anything we can do, please let us know. My family and I would be honored to provide you with anything that will ease your time there, and I am sure that my fellow Booman members would be willing to help, as well.
Please take care of yourself.
Greetings all,
Sorry I have been away. I lost my password on a new computer. I am working hard and preparing for leave.
Regards,
Russ