Poignant Letter From A Soldier

[Kiwon]

(5/2/07) - A Letter from US Army Infantryman Sgt. Eddie Jeffers serving in Iraq

I stare out into the darkness from my post, and I watch the city burn to the ground. I smell the familiar smells, I walk through the familiar rubble, and I look at the frightened faces that watch me pass down the streets of their neighborhoods. My nerves hardly rest; my hands are steady on a device that has been given to me from my government for the purpose of taking the lives of others.

I sweat, and I am tired. My back aches from the loads I carry. Young American boys look to me to direct them in a manner that will someday allow them to see their families again...and yet, I too, am just a boy....my age not but a few years more than that of the ones I lead. I am stressed, I am scared, and I am paranoid...because death is everywhere. It waits for me, it calls to me from around street corners and windows, and it is always there.

There are the demons that follow me, and tempt me into thoughts and actions that are not my own... but that are necessary for survival. I've made compromises with my humanity. And I am not alone in this. Miles from me are my brethren in this world, who walk in the same streets... who feel the same things, whether they admit to it ornot.

And to think, I volunteered for this...

And I am ignorant to the rest of the world...or so I thought.

But even thousands of miles away, in Ramadi, Iraq, the cries and screams and complaints of the ungrateful reach me. In a year, I will be thrust back into society from a life and mentality that doesn't fit your average man. And then, I will be alone. And then, I will walk down the streets of America, and see the yellow ribbon stickers on the cars of the same people who compare our President to Hitler.

I will watch the television and watch the Cindy Sheehans, and the Al Frankens, and the rest of the ignorant sheep of America spout off their mouths about a subject they know nothing about. It is their right, however, and it is a right that is defended by hundreds of thousands of boys and girls scattered across the world, far from home. I use the word boys and girls, because that's what they are. In the Army, the average age of the infantryman is nineteen years old. The average rank of soldiers killed in action is Private First Class.

People like Cindy Sheehan are ignorant. Not just to this war, but to the results of their idiotic ramblings, or at least I hope they are. They don't realize its effects on this war. In this war, there are no Geneva Conventions, no cease fires. Medics and Chaplains are not spared from the enemy's brutality because it's against the rules. I can only imagine the horrors a military Chaplain would experience at the hands of the enemy. The enemy slinks in the shadows and fights a coward's war against us. It is effective though, as many men and women have died since the start of this war. And the memory of their service to America is tainted by the inconsiderate remarks on our nation's news outlets. And every day, the enemy changes...only now, the enemy is becoming something new. The enemy is transitioning from the Muslim extremists to Americans. The enemy is becoming the very people whom we defend with our lives. And they do not realize it. But in denouncing our actions, denouncing our leaders, denouncing the war we live and fight, they are isolating the military from society...and they are becoming our enemy.

Democrats and peace activists like to toss the word "quagmire" around and compare this war to Vietnam. In a way they are right, this war is becoming like Vietnam. Not the actual war, but in the isolation of country and military. America is not a nation at war; they are a nation with its military at war. Like it or not, we are here, some of us for our second, or third times; some even for their fourth and so on. Americans are so concerned now with politics, that it is interfering with our war.

Terrorists cut the heads off of American citizens on the internet...and there is no outrage, but an American soldier kills an Iraqi in the midst of battle, and there are investigations, and sometimes soldiers are even jailed...for doing their job.

It is absolutely sickening to me to think our country has come to this. Why are we so obsessed with the bad news? Why will people stop at nothing to be against this war, no matter how much evidence of the good we've done is thrown in their face? When is the last time CNN or MSNBC or CBS reported the opening of schools and hospitals in Iraq? Or the leaders of terror cells being detained or killed? It's all happening, but people will not let up their hatred of President Bush. They will ignore the good news, because it just might show people that Bush was right.

America has lost its will to fight. It has lost its will to defend what is right and just in the world. The crazy thing of it all is that the American people have not even been asked to sacrifice a single thing. It's not like World War II, where people rationed food and turned in cars to be made into metal for tanks. The American people have not been asked to sacrifice anything. Unless you are in the military or the family member of a servicemember, its life as usual...the war doesn't affect you.

But it affects us. And when it is over and the troops come home and they try to piece together what's left of them after their service...where will the detractors be then? Where will the Cindy Sheehans be to comfort and talk to soldiers and help them sort out the last couple years of their lives, most of which have been spent dodging death and wading through the deaths of their friends? They will be where they always are, somewhere far away, where the horrors of the world can't touch them. Somewhere where they can complain about things they will never experience in their lifetime; things that the young men and women of America have willingly taken upon their shoulders.

We are the hope of the Iraqi people. They want what everyone else wants in life: safety, security, somewhere to call home. They want a country that is safe to raise their children in. Not a place where their children will be abducted, raped and murdered if they do not comply with the terrorists demands. They want to live on, rebuild and prosper. And America has given them the opportunity, but only if we stay true to the cause and see it to its end. But the country must unite in this endeavor...we cannot place the burden on our military alone. We must all stand up and fight, whether in uniform or not. And supporting us is more than sticking yellow ribbon stickers on your cars. It's supporting our President, our troops and our cause.

Right now, the burden is all on the American soldiers. Right now, hope rides alone. But it can change, it must change. Because there is only failure and darkness ahead for us as a country, as a people, if it doesn't.

Let's stop all the political nonsense, let's stop all the bickering, let's stop all the bad news and let's stand and fight!

Isn't that what America is about anyway?
.................................................. .............................................

Sgt. Eddie Jeffers was killed in Iraq on September 19, 2007 when his vehicle overturned in an accident; he was 23.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

By SGT B K
Bellacaoi, August 26, 2005
From: B K

To: J C
Sent: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 00:29:57 -0400
Subject: Re: HMMWVs

J C
Special Assistant to the Chief of Staff
U.S. Senator Olympia Snow
154 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Mr. C

We have not received all the 1114 HMMWV’s that are required for our mission.

I still head out of the gate in a 1025 Humvee that doesn’t have floor armor, basically all you have is armored windows and sub par armored doors. As evident by the bullet holes and shrapnel cuts that you can look directly through I would say they aren’t very effective.

Most of these trucks have been through two tours here taking numerous poundings and are starting on their third. We have inadequate maintenance manpower to maintain these vehicles having much less maintenance staff, and when I mean much less that is a gross understatement.

It is being felt at all levels, many vehicles have to be hot started which means a switching of the crews leaving no time for proper maintenance. Our maintenance guys are champions working there butts off to keep us going.

The command structure at the highly levels has grossly mismanaged this brigade.

The only thing we had going for us through the 6 months at Camp Shelby was that we were training together. At the last moment most of the groups have been re-task organized splitting us up. It amazes me that the command could not have foreseen this earlier since they could have talked and consulted with the group in this area.

Shelby taught us nothing and was a waste of the tax payers dollars, a tremendous misallocation of resources. Nothing we learned there is applicable here and I learned more in our "right seat ride" with the 1/9th than the whole time at Shelby.

General Honare (Sp) made the statement at our deployment ceremony we are the best trained, best equipped soldiers, ever sent from Camp Shelby. If that is true the Army is broken which it is and is quite evident.

My vehicle constantly breaks down, my turret which is the main weapons platform hardly spins and some don’t spin, and our tanks which have had problems since Shelby are now breaking down. I think the tankers would want me to tell you of their woes since no one else seems to care.

When I asked about my trucks condition to one officer his only comment was fix it, I am not a mechanic and spend 12 hrs preparing and working on my mission am I to spend the other 12 hrs fixing my vehicle.

The higher command leadership is gutless and appalling. They all seem to have 1114’s and I haven’t seen one of them outside the wire.

This is just the equipment issues.

The people here hate us and will always hate us until we go home.

Some officer might blow smoke up the proverbial ass and say that people like us but I work with them everyday.

They hate our interference in their government which only serves as a recruitment drive for the enemy and makes life miserable for the moderates.

I was talking to a friend of the 1/9th, the group we replaced, and he said when he first arrived the market was open and the economy was puttering along after the war, now the economy is gone and the lure of hard currency to become and support insurgent activities is more common place.

On top of things you cannot win a hearts and mind campaign here so every time we play that game people get hurt because it looks like weakness on our part and they take advantage of it.

We fight for survival my men and I. There is not greater or ethereal agenda, it is to survive. They have sent a National Guard unit in the worse place in the world according to the state department.



People here are tired of being lied to and are frustrated with the apparent lack or care of anyone.

The people of this land want us gone and if we support a democracy and true democratic processes then we should do as they bid and let them become a sovereign nation again.

I most likely will be reprimanded and or punished for telling you about the inadequacies of the Army and its run down nature right now but the truth needs to be heard and that is something that not one here or at home seems to want to face.

Our hands become more tied here everyday, we fight by rules of engagement that do not apply to the war being fought here. We were reprimanded for test firing our weapons outside the FOB the other day to see if they were in good working order. Then were apologized to when we told them what goes on out there and that you need your weapon up. Now we are hesitant to fire our weapons and here that will get you killed.

The commanders here exist and try to convince themselves that everything is fine which it is not. It is very frustrating and I look forward to coming home and leaving this broken Army.

Integrity, honor, selfless service, and many of the cornerstones of the Army are gone and they began their demise at the very top of the chain of command.

Please feel free to ask questions if makes it easier for me to respond.

I thank you for your concern and help and look forward to returning to the shores of Maine.

Take care, sincerely, SGT B K

http://www.militaryproject.org/article.asp?id=665

[Harlan Huckleby]

soldiers are just citizens like the rest of us. you can find a soldier to support any point of view. stupid.

[Zool]

soldiers are just citizens like the rest of us. you can find a soldier to support any point of view. stupid.

Are you calling the soldiers stupid, or are you calling Kiwon and TB stupid?

[Harlan Huckleby]

the ploy of using individual soldiers as holy spokespeople is stupid. it adds nothing, simply plays upon emotions.

"stupid" is perhaps the wrong word, although it is that too.
how about unproductive, cheap, manipulative.

The military has a certain status, level of respect. I don't like when one side of a political debates tries to claim that goodwill as their own.

[Zool]

I don't like when one side of a political debates tries to claim that goodwill as their own.

So essentially you hate politics as a whole? Cause thats pretty much the long and the short of politics IMO.

[Harlan Huckleby]

ya, a lot of politics is just mindless marketing. smearing the other guy. Aligning yourself with babies, mothers, brave soldiers.

I wouldn't say that is the long and short of it though. There's also a lot of reason in there too. The bullshit sways people at the margins. Most people think a lot about issues, even if they are not completely informed.

[Freak Out]

I'm sorry to say he is just as "ignorant" as any Cindy Sheehan or any of the other "Detractors".

[Harlan Huckleby]

oh ya, and for the record, Kiwon and Tyrone are both dumber than a box of rocks. :P

[SkinBasket]

I'm sorry to say he is just as "ignorant" as any Cindy Sheehan or any of the other "Detractors".

Using Sheehan as an example of a "detractor" isn't exactly fair to detractors.

[SkinBasket]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=KgFyEgxxe38

The landmine video making the rounds today.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

oh ya, and for the record, Kiwon and Tyrone are both dumber than a box of rocks. :P

Box of rocks says, "i'm insulted."

[Tyrone Bigguns]

soldiers are just citizens like the rest of us. you can find a soldier to support any point of view. stupid.

That is exactly my point.

BTW, I for one, would LOVE to see the end of Kiwon's politcal postings. I started mine just to EMPHASIZE how dumb they are.

If we wanna have a politics thread, fine. But, his relentless posts that essentially bash the dems/libs is just tiring.

[Harlan Huckleby]

never mind, i got nothin

[Charles Woodson]

yea and hes creeping up to even my post count!

[Kiwon]

Well, I am offended.

How cynical, how jaded, how ass-backward do you have to be to take a letter from a soldier that ends, “Let's stop all the political nonsense, let's stop all the bickering, let's stop all the bad news and let's stand and fight! Isn't that what America is about anyway?” and then turn it into a political debate!

I gave no comment or personal opinion. I simply posted this man’s (not kid’s, he was a man) letter because, more than being impressed with his writing style and agreeing with his sentiments, I was touched by the fact that he won’t be writing any more letters ever again.

This man died last week defending you losers’ freedoms. He died (Do you understand the concept?). He died thousands of miles away from his home, from his family, from his friends. He died in a place he did not want to be in, yet felt he had to go to. He died defending his country in the hopes that his children and others will not have to go and fight the same battle.

You guys disgust me because you are the epitome of what Eddie Jeffers was talking about.

You are so divested in anything relating to America’s war against terrorism and Islamo-facism that simply YOU DON’T CARE! You don’t care about American soldiers dying, you don’t care about long-term stability in the Middle East, you don’t care about America’s place and influence in the world.

It’s just all one, big sophomoric joke, isn’t it?

This post was about Sgt. Eddie Jeffers who at age 23 had more class and courage than any critic on this board. He took action, he volunteered to defend his country while the vast majority of Americans do absolutely nothing and then complain about those who care and are active.

Yeah, maybe I should stop posting anything patriotic because it seems very few can appreciate what this man did and the fact that he died. His service and his sacrifice speak for itself and you self-centered morons don’t “get it.”

On the other hand, your ignorance won’t be a censor to me. I posted Eddie Jeffers’ letter because an articulate and wise beyond-his-years soldier died last week. He died, and his short life is worthy to be remembered and publicly honored. That’s why I posted his letter.

What’s dumber than rocks? Most of what you’ve posted here.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Let's stop all the political nonsense .

What bullshit. B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T

That letter is chock-full of political attacks. Fine. But then the writer can't claim to be above the fray.

I was only joking about you and Tyrone being dumb, I certainly don't think that at all. The letter you posted is highly politicized, you have to expect some blow-back when you go that route.

[Kiwon]

Let's stop all the political nonsense .

What bullshit. B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T

You actually question this man's credibility? I’m speechless….

Disagree with his opinions if you want, but he was speaking from Iraq and living the experience. So you disagree with his politics and therefore his life and death isn't worth noting? Why denigrate him? To what end? The man is dead.

God knows, man, do you have a heart?

jeffers221@bellsouth.net Eddie Jeffers' father's name is David.

Why don't you take one minute and write David Jeffers an email and thank him for raising a brave son who died defending your country?

[hoosier]

Let's stop all the political nonsense .

What bullshit. B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T

You actually question this man's credibility? I’m speechless….


I don't think it was the soldier's credibility that was being questioned, it was your sincerity. Posting something like that and then complaining about other people politicizing the issue--it reeks of hypocrisy.

[Joemailman]

It is, in my estimation, unrealistic to expect people to put politics aside in regard to this war. It was the President who first injected politics into this arena by insisting that the vote to authorize the war be held before the 2002 elections, thereby using that vote, which should not be political, as a political tool. The war issue became viciously political when Max Cleland, who left limbs on the battlefield in Vietnam, had his patriotism impugned because he voted against the war authorization.

Sgt. Jeffers gave his life in service to his country, and for that he deserves our respect and our gratitude. However, in his letter he asks us to continue to support the policies of a President who many of us believe is incapable of understanding how to bring this occupation to a successful conclusion. He is asking us to continue to throw good money after bad. Many of us believe that a change of course is needed in Iraq, and that to continue to support the policies of this President is not fair to the troops who are currently serving in Iraq. We are not bickerers, we are not oblivious to the threats posed by Islamic extremism. We are, and will continue to be this President's loyal opposition.

[mraynrand]

It is, in my estimation, unrealistic to expect people to put politics aside in regard to this war. It was the President who first injected politics into this arena by insisting that the vote to authorize the war be held before the 2002 elections, thereby using that vote, which should not be political, as a political tool. The war issue became viciously political when Max Cleland, who left limbs on the battlefield in Vietnam, had his patriotism impugned because he voted against the war authorization.

Sgt. Jeffers gave his life in service to his country, and for that he deserves our respect and our gratitude. However, in his letter he asks us to continue to support the policies of a President who many of us believe is incapable of understanding how to bring this occupation to a successful conclusion. He is asking us to continue to throw good money after bad. Many of us believe that a change of course is needed in Iraq, and that to continue to support the policies of this President is not fair to the troops who are currently serving in Iraq. We are not bickerers, we are not oblivious to the threats posed by Islamic extremism. We are, and will continue to be this President's loyal opposition.

1) Check your facts on Cleland.

2) Do any of you who oppose U.S. (Bush's) policy in Iraq ever consider that in the long therm, you might be wrong?

3) One thing that impresses me about our soldiers is that, although they are far from perfect as a group, they are indeed a great group of guys, and most Americans continually debate the wisdom of the war policy as we lose these guys. In other words, we value these guys so much, that we are debate changing course every time we suffer a single death. Many of those we are fighting are the polar opposite - they celebrate the death of the individual, especially if the person who died did so detonating children, women and other Iraqis in the name Allah (may he be praised).

[SkinBasket]

It is, in my estimation, unrealistic to expect people to put politics aside in regard to this war. It was the President who first injected politics into this arena by insisting that the vote to authorize the war be held before the 2002 elections, thereby using that vote, which should not be political, as a political tool.

You're right. It would have been much less political to let mid-term elections dictate the terms of going to war. How inconsiderate of the President.

[Joemailman]

It is, in my estimation, unrealistic to expect people to put politics aside in regard to this war. It was the President who first injected politics into this arena by insisting that the vote to authorize the war be held before the 2002 elections, thereby using that vote, which should not be political, as a political tool.

You're right. It would have been much less political to let mid-term elections dictate the terms of going to war. How inconsiderate of the President.

The President could have waited until after the election to ask for the authorization and still gotten it. If not, if he needs a party-line vote to get the authorization, then he has more persuading to do before taking the country to war.

[Harlan Huckleby]

You actually question this man's credibility?

He takes political swipes, then he (and you, implicitly) claim we should rally around his words, as if this is the one, true patriotic viewpoint. Disgusting.



Disagree with his opinions if you want, but he was speaking from Iraq and living the experience

I never disagreed with his opinions or politics. I never mentioned what I think about the war.



So you disagree with his politics and therefore his life and death isn't worth noting? Why denigrate him? God knows, man, do you have a heart?

I am not speaking to this man or his family. I am responding to a manipulative political document posted in an internet forum.

When Ann Coulter made a jab at the wives of the 911 victims, I admired her. Maybe she was an insensitive dick, but you know what, the organization she was challenging was using a horrible trajedy to score political points.

Using tragedy for politics rubs me the wrong way. This letter is in that vein.

[Harlan Huckleby]

and by the way:
I hope no hard feelings will last long from this rough discussion.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Let's stop all the political nonsense .

What bullshit. B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T

You actually question this man's credibility? I’m speechless….

Disagree with his opinions if you want, but he was speaking from Iraq and living the experience. So you disagree with his politics and therefore his life and death isn't worth noting? Why denigrate him? To what end? The man is dead.

God knows, man, do you have a heart?

jeffers221@bellsouth.net Eddie Jeffers' father's name is David.

Why don't you take one minute and write David Jeffers an email and thank him for raising a brave son who died defending your country?

Get serious. It is and was a political statement.

and, he wasn't defending my country. I don't recall any iraqi attacks on this soil. I don't recall them massing troops to attack us.

He was there nation building and furthering our control of oil.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

1) Check your facts on Cleland.

2) Do any of you who oppose U.S. (Bush's) policy in Iraq ever consider that in the long therm, you might be wrong?

3) One thing that impresses me about our soldiers is that, although they are far from perfect as a group, they are indeed a great group of guys, and most Americans continually debate the wisdom of the war policy as we lose these guys. In other words, we value these guys so much, that we are debate changing course every time we suffer a single death. Many of those we are fighting are the polar opposite - they celebrate the death of the individual, especially if the person who died did so detonating children, women and other Iraqis in the name Allah (may he be praised).

Which facts should we be checking on Cleland?

Let's recall. Republican opponent, Rep. Saxby Chambliss attacked him, "for breaking his oath to protect and defend the Constitution."

Cleland who lost both legs and an arm in the service of his country. Chambliss did not participate in Vietnam. He had a bad knee. Again joing the ranks of hawkish repubs like cheney and rush who NEVER served.

Cleland had voted for an amendment to the Chemical Weapons Treaty that eliminated a ban on citizens of terrorist nations being on U.N. inspection teams in Iraq. It was a majority vote, 56 to 44, and among those in support were Sen. Bill Frist, the FREAKIN chairman of the Senate Republican campaign committee who HANDPICKED Chambliss.

But, where was Chamblis' outrage towards the MAJORITY and Repubs? 55 other senators seem equally reprehensible and guilty of oath-breaking, Chambliss said the majority was not "overwhelming," and that, although the aye-sayers merited the lash, Chambliss was letting them walk because "he is concerned only about how Sen. Cleland voted, which was contrary to the way Georgians would have voted."

Ok. So, let's move on to the tv ad.

"As America faces terrorists and extremist dictators, Max Cleland runs television ads claiming he has the courage to lead.
"He says he supports President Bush at every opportunity, but that's not the truth."
"Since July, Max Cleland voted against President Bush's vital homeland security efforts 11 times."
"But the record proves, Max Cleland is just misleading."

What exactly was Cleland opposed to? Opposed to civil service protections for Homeland Security employees, which Bush opposed and Cleland supported. The ad failed to point out that Cleland supported the creation of a Department of Homeland Security before Bush did. Cleland originally co-sponsored the enabling legislation and eventually supported it, but as the bill moved through Congress, he cast a number of votes against it in hopes of getting a better bill.

Or, let's not forget right wing loon Ann Coulter who wrote that wrote that Cleland should not be referred to as a war hero, as he had lost his limbs in a routine non-combat misssion.

Rand, you are better than this.

[mraynrand]

1) Check your facts on Cleland.

2) Do any of you who oppose U.S. (Bush's) policy in Iraq ever consider that in the long therm, you might be wrong?

3) One thing that impresses me about our soldiers is that, although they are far from perfect as a group, they are indeed a great group of guys, and most Americans continually debate the wisdom of the war policy as we lose these guys. In other words, we value these guys so much, that we are debate changing course every time we suffer a single death. Many of those we are fighting are the polar opposite - they celebrate the death of the individual, especially if the person who died did so detonating children, women and other Iraqis in the name Allah (may he be praised).

Which facts should we be checking on Cleland?

Let's recall. Republican opponent, Rep. Saxby Chambliss attacked him, "for breaking his oath to protect and defend the Constitution."

Cleland who lost both legs and an arm in the service of his country. Chambliss did not participate in Vietnam. He had a bad knee. Again joing the ranks of hawkish repubs like cheney and rush who NEVER served.

Cleland had voted for an amendment to the Chemical Weapons Treaty that eliminated a ban on citizens of terrorist nations being on U.N. inspection teams in Iraq. It was a majority vote, 56 to 44, and among those in support were Sen. Bill Frist, the FREAKIN chairman of the Senate Republican campaign committee who HANDPICKED Chambliss.

But, where was Chamblis' outrage towards the MAJORITY and Repubs? 55 other senators seem equally reprehensible and guilty of oath-breaking, Chambliss said the majority was not "overwhelming," and that, although the aye-sayers merited the lash, Chambliss was letting them walk because "he is concerned only about how Sen. Cleland voted, which was contrary to the way Georgians would have voted."

Ok. So, let's move on to the tv ad.

"As America faces terrorists and extremist dictators, Max Cleland runs television ads claiming he has the courage to lead.
"He says he supports President Bush at every opportunity, but that's not the truth."
"Since July, Max Cleland voted against President Bush's vital homeland security efforts 11 times."
"But the record proves, Max Cleland is just misleading."

What exactly was Cleland opposed to? Opposed to civil service protections for Homeland Security employees, which Bush opposed and Cleland supported. The ad failed to point out that Cleland supported the creation of a Department of Homeland Security before Bush did. Cleland originally co-sponsored the enabling legislation and eventually supported it, but as the bill moved through Congress, he cast a number of votes against it in hopes of getting a better bill.

Or, let's not forget right wing loon Ann Coulter who wrote that wrote that Cleland should not be referred to as a war hero, as he had lost his limbs in a routine non-combat misssion.

Rand, you are better than this.

Bigguns, sometimes you're just a blowhard. My statement was simple - check your facts. Battlefield vs. non-combat. There is a big distinction there and I didn't make it. I didn't say anything about commercials or Sexy Chamblis or Coulter. That's all your B.S. But people who drag out Cleland ought to know better than to say he was wounded 'on the battlefield.' You're better than that. Or maybe not.

[mraynrand]

and to the point of this thread - just as Cindy Sheehan doesn't have moral authority with respect to her political view of the war because she lost a son, so too do soldiers (wounded KIA or otherwise) not have extra authority over any other American to offer their political two cents about the war. Trotting out a soldier or a veteran to support your particular political point of view shouldn't gain you political points, but at least you should be able to make your point, and people should know that there are soldiers and veterans who support the war just as there are those that oppose it. Ask MSNBC if they agree with this statement.

Also, there is a huge distinction between asking a soldier about his political view on the war versus his view on the situation in Iraq. Despite likely bias (since the overwhelming percentage of soldiers support the mission), you'll get a better idea of what's going on in Iraq from a soldier or a Micheal Yon than you will from a 'reporter' hiding in his hotel getting info from 'insurgent' sources. But it's important to recognize the distinction between a political perspective, which everyone in entitled to, and an informed perspective, which some have and others don't, and biased viewpoints, which the mainstream media and the soldiers have.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

1) Check your facts on Cleland.

2) Do any of you who oppose U.S. (Bush's) policy in Iraq ever consider that in the long therm, you might be wrong?

3) One thing that impresses me about our soldiers is that, although they are far from perfect as a group, they are indeed a great group of guys, and most Americans continually debate the wisdom of the war policy as we lose these guys. In other words, we value these guys so much, that we are debate changing course every time we suffer a single death. Many of those we are fighting are the polar opposite - they celebrate the death of the individual, especially if the person who died did so detonating children, women and other Iraqis in the name Allah (may he be praised).

Which facts should we be checking on Cleland?

Let's recall. Republican opponent, Rep. Saxby Chambliss attacked him, "for breaking his oath to protect and defend the Constitution."

Cleland who lost both legs and an arm in the service of his country. Chambliss did not participate in Vietnam. He had a bad knee. Again joing the ranks of hawkish repubs like cheney and rush who NEVER served.

Cleland had voted for an amendment to the Chemical Weapons Treaty that eliminated a ban on citizens of terrorist nations being on U.N. inspection teams in Iraq. It was a majority vote, 56 to 44, and among those in support were Sen. Bill Frist, the FREAKIN chairman of the Senate Republican campaign committee who HANDPICKED Chambliss.

But, where was Chamblis' outrage towards the MAJORITY and Repubs? 55 other senators seem equally reprehensible and guilty of oath-breaking, Chambliss said the majority was not "overwhelming," and that, although the aye-sayers merited the lash, Chambliss was letting them walk because "he is concerned only about how Sen. Cleland voted, which was contrary to the way Georgians would have voted."

Ok. So, let's move on to the tv ad.

"As America faces terrorists and extremist dictators, Max Cleland runs television ads claiming he has the courage to lead.
"He says he supports President Bush at every opportunity, but that's not the truth."
"Since July, Max Cleland voted against President Bush's vital homeland security efforts 11 times."
"But the record proves, Max Cleland is just misleading."

What exactly was Cleland opposed to? Opposed to civil service protections for Homeland Security employees, which Bush opposed and Cleland supported. The ad failed to point out that Cleland supported the creation of a Department of Homeland Security before Bush did. Cleland originally co-sponsored the enabling legislation and eventually supported it, but as the bill moved through Congress, he cast a number of votes against it in hopes of getting a better bill.

Or, let's not forget right wing loon Ann Coulter who wrote that wrote that Cleland should not be referred to as a war hero, as he had lost his limbs in a routine non-combat misssion.

Rand, you are better than this.

Bigguns, sometimes you're just a blowhard. My statement was simple - check your facts. Battlefield vs. non-combat. There is a big distinction there and I didn't make it. I didn't say anything about commercials or Sexy Chamblis or Coulter. That's all your B.S. But people who drag out Cleland ought to know better than to say he was wounded 'on the battlefield.' You're better than that. Or maybe not.

Rand, you need to be able to discern when a simple mistake is being made. I this case your check your facts was misunderstood.

For the record, it is worth noting that Cleland was awarded a Silver Star "for gallantry in action" at the battle of Khe Sanh.

Furthermore, Cleland was on a mountaintop with his Signal team to set up a radio relay when he lost his legs and right arm to a grenade explosion. Granted, his own grenade...but, you and other's are really splitting hairs when it comes to the battlefield.

Would you be as harsh to this admin regarding their exploitation of Pat tillman. Is he a hero since he was killed by friendly fire?

[mraynrand]

yeah, the Tillman thing was *ucked up. But that just speaks to my point and the point made by several others - that trotting out your favorite veteran or mother with a lost child as a political tool is wrong. And you'll recall that it was a concerted effort by the Dems to round up veterans for candidates in the midterm elections. You hear Republicans talking about doing the same thing this round.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

yeah, the Tillman thing was *ucked up. But that just speaks to my point and the point made by several others - that trotting out your favorite veteran or mother with a lost child as a political tool is wrong. And you'll recall that it was a concerted effort by the Dems to round up veterans for candidates in the midterm elections. You hear Republicans talking about doing the same thing this round.

I'm in total agreement about trotting soldiers out. That was the point of my posting the other soldier's letter. The whole thing serves no purpose, unless it is to establish exactly "what is happening over there." And, even that is a dicey proposition.

Though i'm not sure it was a concerted effort by dems. But, in the face of being told that if you were patriotic you supported the war, what other choice is left? Not to mention Rove/Atwater strategy the war was good for repubs, bad for dems. Therefore dems had to overcome the patriotism issue..and who is best to do that? Obviously ex-soldiers.

I for one would love to see an end to people questioning others patriotism.

I have always said that the repubs are much better lately at campaigning. They are willing to go much deeper, dirtier, and better at utilizing their resources. In the face of that, there is no choice. You can't keep turning the cheek. It sounds good, but it is poor political strategy.

Unfortunately, most of the citizens have to be bludgeoned in order to understand.

[mraynrand]

I have always said that the repubs are much better lately at campaigning. They are willing to go much deeper, dirtier, and better at utilizing their resources. In the face of that, there is no choice. You can't keep turning the cheek. It sounds good, but it is poor political strategy.

You counting Soros in that estimation?

I thought the Republicans did very well in motivating their base in some places by ginning up a realtively mild/medium threat - like gay marriage - into a clarion call. The Dems seemed to like gotcha politics more than the Repubs, especially in the midterms - and if you recall, in 2004 Kerry was blaming Bush for absolutely everything that was going wrong, including vaccination shortages. That's not too surprising, considering how long the Dms were out of power. 2008 will be ugly as sin, especially if it's HillBilly against Giuliani. Together they have more skeletons than Arlington.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I have always said that the repubs are much better lately at campaigning. They are willing to go much deeper, dirtier, and better at utilizing their resources. In the face of that, there is no choice. You can't keep turning the cheek. It sounds good, but it is poor political strategy.

You counting Soros in that estimation?

I thought the Republicans did very well in motivating their base in some places by ginning up a realtively mild/medium threat - like gay marriage - into a clarion call. The Dems seemed to like gotcha politics more than the Repubs, especially in the midterms - and if you recall, in 2004 Kerry was blaming Bush for absolutely everything that was going wrong, including vaccination shortages. That's not too surprising, considering how long the Dms were out of power. 2008 will be ugly as sin, especially if it's HillBilly against Giuliani. Together they have more skeletons than Arlington.

Repubs, imho, went dirty first..or dirtier. Atwater was the master, Rove has transcended.

I don't ever recall the sort of mean spirited attacks like we saw on cleland or McCain.

Gotcha: Well, i can kinda see your point. But, I don't recall the dems putting new terms into politics like swiftboating.

Bush: Sorry, but heavy is the head that wears the crown. Bush is to blame. Would i cut him some slack..yes, if he would ever take some responsibility. Geez, i don't recall any prez who consistently emphasizes the buck doesn't stop at his desk.

Election: Pretty much agree. I can't wait if Giuliani is the nom. Forget skeletons..the guy can't even handle being questioned. Oh, and Judi..oops, Judith...that woman is just outright scary. She must eff really good, cause she has him by the balls.

[mraynrand]

Oh, and Judi..oops, Judith...that woman is just outright scary. She must eff really good, cause she has him by the balls.

That's just weird. But Giuliani does the cell phone shtiick at all his speeches. I've seen the guy in person and he did a cell phone gag in that talk. He may not like questions, but Rudy G is a pretty impressive guy.

[LEWCWA]

Defending our nation? Thats funny, Why not lead all these insurgents back to Afgan country and fight it out there? Oh yeah, they don't have the Texas Tea! Anyhow these poor soldiers are brainwashed, the army is very good at that!

[Kiwon]

and by the way:
I hope no hard feelings will last long from this rough discussion.

No hard feelings on my end either. I'll work through my frustration.

I did write David Jeffers and thanked him for brave son, Eddie.

His reply to me began, "Kiwon, Your words honor my son and I thank you. The outpouring of love that we've received and the prayers are literally sustaining our family."

I heard Eddie's story, read his letter, was impressed, posted it and noted that he died. For whatever reason, the fact that this 23 year-old died in Iraq representing me really moved me.

In fairness, given that I'm one of the few vocal conservatives here, I can understand how someone could question my motives. But I had no hidden agendas or political motives when I started this post. I was simply sharing a story that touched me, that's all.

My goal was to draw attention to Eddie and his sacrifice. Having expressed my thoughts to his father and having him say that I honored his son is special to me and no criticism here will diminsh that. Like I said, for some reason this story especially touched me.

Okay, I'm done talking about it. I'm sorry if I was unfairly critical of you. If I was accurate, then you deserved it. If I was wrong, then I apologize. As I mentioned before, I can see how things might easily have been misinterpreted and, like you, I am bothered when soldiers are used as political props to argue a point. That wasn't my intention at all.

I will say that I like your football commentary more than your politics, but there's still hope for you. Even Darth Vader resisted the dark side of the Force and returned to his Anakin Skywalker roots. I know there is still good in you and you can be turned.

Peace. 8-)

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Oh, and Judi..oops, Judith...that woman is just outright scary. She must eff really good, cause she has him by the balls.

That's just weird. But Giuliani does the cell phone shtiick at all his speeches. I've seen the guy in person and he did a cell phone gag in that talk. He may not like questions, but Rudy G is a pretty impressive guy.

If you get a chance, read the Vanity Fair article on her. Down right scary.

Impressive: I'm not so impressed and neither were most New Yorkers when he left office. My favorite part is when he gets asked a question and he tries to look ok with it, but his body language and facial expressions just give him away.

[mraynrand]

Impressive: I'm not so impressed and neither were most New Yorkers when he left office.

Who does impress you?

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Impressive: I'm not so impressed and neither were most New Yorkers when he left office.

Who does impress you?

Maybe impress is the wrong word, since each person has definitely accomplished something.

On the repub side? I would certainly vote for Huckabee.

Brownback: Can't go with someone that socially conservative and tied with christian activists. Though flat tax is always interesting.

Hunter: Way to socially conservative.

Keyes: He is way smart. I don't agree with him but i do respect him and his thoughts.

McCain: I live in AZ. Straight talk express has derailed. too much kow towing to the far right. Sold his soul. Still have immense respect for his accomplishments.

Paul: Interesting, but ultimately doomed. I like getting rid of the debt. But, not sure i want to slash everything not covered under constitution. I understand where he is coming from, but at this stage of the game...well, the cat is outta the bag.

Romney: Liked him, but his sudden shift is a bit disturbing. I don't know what he believes in. I guess he is the repub version of clinton.

Tancredo: Do i really need to explain?

Thompson: I'm not sure exactly where he stands.

[Joemailman]

I agree that Huckabee is the most impressive of the Republican field. He gave a speech today that supported the troop surge in Iraq, but strongly criticized other aspects of the Bush foreign policy. It will be interesting to see if this helps him or hurts him.

Huckabee rips President Bush's foreign policy
By Steven Thomma | McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee ripped the Bush administration's war against terrorism Friday, delivering a bold and potentially risky speech that could establish the former Arkansas governor as the maverick among top Republican candidates and test his party's loyalty to President Bush.

"This administration's bunker mentality has been counterproductive both at home and abroad," Huckabee said in opening a broad indictment of Bush's style and policy.

The speech came after several top Republican candidates started distancing themselves from Bush, vowing change on such issues as illegal immigration and federal spending even as they endorsed Bush's foreign policy.

By going much further than his rivals have in attacking Bush, Huckabee could draw attention to a campaign that's inched up in polls in recent months but still lacks the money and organization that can compete head-on with better-known, better-financed candidates such as Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson.

In first-to-vote Iowa, for example, an average of four recent polls put Huckabee fourth among Republican candidates with 10.3 percent, ahead of John McCain and within five points of Giuliani and Thompson, but far behind front-runner Romney, according to RealClearPolitics.com.

His strong stand also could give him the kind of maverick image that McCain courted in 2000, which appeals to independent voters in states such as New Hampshire, where they can vote in the Republican primary.

But it also could turn off the majority of Republicans who still like Bush.

"He's trying to carve out a responsible alternative to the administration's foreign policy," said Dennis Goldford, a political scientist at Drake University in Iowa. "But I don't know that it will do him any good in the Republican Party. While there is a lot of grumbling in the Republican Party about Bush, they're still pretty loyal."

On one hotly debated issue, Huckabee endorsed Bush's surge of troops into Iraq, urging more time for that to work and criticizing Democratic proposals to get troops out as an invitation to chaos.

But beyond that, he differed with Bush across the map, using language more often heard from Democrats. He accused the administration of shunning allies and turning world sentiment against the United States.

"They've done a poor job of communicating and consulting countries much as they have, frankly, the American people," Huckabee told about 150 people at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a center-right think tank in Washington. "Our prestige in the world has been marred."

On Iran, he said Bush blew a chance to improve relations right after the 2001 terrorist attacks and that the United States should be talking to Iran today.

"When we first invaded Afghanistan, Iran helped, especially in dealings with their ally, the Northern Alliance," he said. "They wanted to join us in fighting al Qaida. ...The CIA and State Department supported a partnership. Some in the White House and beyond did not. And when President Bush included Iran in the axis of evil, everything went downhill pretty fast."

Even with today's sour relations, he said the United States should talk to Iran and use the promise of better relations and increased trade as well as the threat of economic isolation to persuade the country to abandon its nuclear program.

"The administration has quite properly said it will not take the military option off the table. But if we don't put some other options on the table, eventually the military option becomes the only viable one. Right now we're proceeding down only one track," he said.

He all but echoed Democrat Barack Obama in opening the door to strike al Qaida in Pakistan even without that government's approval, saying the Bush administration has a "muddle of policy" there.

He questioned whether Bush was in charge at a critical point in the hunt for al Qaida. He said Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld called off a 2005 raid into Pakistan to nab Osama bin Laden's top deputy because the mission had grown just large enough that he thought it would need the Pakistan government's approval.

"Why did Rumsfeld call it off and not President Bush? Did the president even know about it? ...When I'm president, I will make the final call on such action, not my secretary of defense."

[Merlin]

Politics aside, name me a president with a country at war that has faced anything close to the media bashing Bush has. In fact, name me a president that has faced the the likes of 9/11, hurricanes and a hostile anti-American press. You can't. And it is the media who perpetuates your opinions. Do you get all sides before making a decision? Do you stop for a second and think that maybe the whole "Bush lied people died" is a misnomer? Probably not. You think what you think and it was your decision to think it right?

If that is the case then I can feel nothing for you, not sympathy, not empathy nor sorrow. Partisan politics are pulling this country a part at the seems. The media, a majority of it, is ultra left wing. They spew socialism at every turn. More money for the poor, more money for health care, more money for global warming. But never once do the people responsible take a long hard look at what they are doing to the country. Man Made Global Warming is a myth and not backed up by science. Health Care is expensive BECAUSE the government is involved and the "poor" in this country suffer at the hands of idiots who raise alcohol, tobacco, gas and sales taxes all to further their socialist agenda. Consider that we are in a war with a group of people that think like it's the Crusades all over again. They have no problem dying in the name of God. So what do we do? Bash our President at every turn and try to micro manage a war. War is not pretty and it is never played by any rules. Mistakes happen, people die. These same people like yourself who scoff at things like this really have nothing to add but hatred. You hate the President, you hate this you hate that. And more then likely the second the government gives something away for free you are the first to sign up. All the while never putting 2+2 together to see that it isn't free and someone had to pay for it and it wasn't the government.

The sooner people realize that EVERY media outlet tears people a part, the better. The smartest thing I was every told about hearing the different sides of a story is that the truth is always somewhere in the middle. Nothing is ever as bad as it seems and nothing is ever as good as it seems. Always error in the side of caution and you won't get caught with your pants down. Most people don't think they are conservative but I beg to differ. The second the government steps on your rights, you become conservative in a hurry.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I agree that Huckabee is the most impressive of the Republican field. He gave a speech today that supported the troop surge in Iraq, but strongly criticized other aspects of the Bush foreign policy.

This is just the John McCain playbook: essentially support Bush's policy, except imply if they were in charge the bad parts wouldn't have happened.

Huckabee is just the new John McCain. McCain with a fresher face. He is appealing to liberals because there is no foam running out of the corner of his mouth, he seems like such a nice, reasonable, intelligent person. I like both McCain & Huckabee.

But... McCain & Huckabee are both more conservative than George Bush on most issues.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Politics aside, name me a president with a country at war that has faced anything close to the media bashing Bush has.

Dick Nixon. No question.

Bush has been ridiculed about as much as can be done. But he talks funny, what do you expect?

[mraynrand]

But... McCain & Huckabee are both more conservative than George Bush on most issues.

No kidding. Bush is essentially John F. Kennedy. The big difference is that Bush pulled the trigger in Iraq and JFK didn't in Cuba, while JFK 'pulled the trigger' outside his marriage and Bush didn't. But both are/were pro big business, pro tax cut, believers in the ability of government to solve problems, pro spreading democracy. Very similar. I think I recall a book a while ago where a guy made the case that Tricky Dick would be a Democrat in today's political environment and Kennedy would be a Republican, based solely on what they had done as president.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Tricky Dick would be a Democrat in today's political environment and Kennedy would be a Republican, based solely on what they had done as president.

Kennedy only gets to be a Republican because he was president at height of cold war tension, therefore he is "militaristic."

Johnson - you can have Johnson. Sadly, I'm afraid Tricky would be a Democrat today. The country is just more conservative than it was 30 years ago.

[Joemailman]

Eisenhower would definitely be a Democrat today, probably to the left of all the Dem presidential candidates except for Kucinich. Goldwater would probably fit in more with Libertarians than with the current Republicans. It will be interesting to see if the post-Bush Republican party returns to traditional Conservative principles of smaller government, fiscal responsibility, (reducing budget deficits) and non-interventionist foreign policy.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Got your Ron Paul bumper sticker, Joe?

[Joemailman]

Ron Paul has no chance. He's too honest.

[Harlan Huckleby]

oh, bullshit.

He has no chance, therefore he CAN be honest.

And by "honest" I think we me forthcoming, direct.

[Joemailman]

Well, I think we're both right. Because he has no chance of winning, he can just speak his mind. However, it would be impossible for someone to say we never should have gone into Iraq, as Paul has done, and still have a shot at the Republican nomination.

[mraynrand]

Ron Paul has no chance. He's too honest.

And he's too non-sensical. He cojmes across as being in denial of reality, suggesting a complete withdrawal of the U.S. from the mideast. Who does he think will move in (China), who will suffer (all our allies) and what will happen to the world economy (it will tank). Plus, he wants to abolish all non-essential government agencies - as do I. It's a nice thought, but it's as unrealistic as Kucinich wanting a 'Department of Peace.' At some level, your presidential candidate has to have the appearance that he understands how the world works. Now if Ron Paul said he was going to eliminate just one department, he might come across as practical. He's not a bad guy at all, and some of his arguments (such as 'why they attacked us') require thoughtful responses, not dismissive denunciations. But his positions are, across the board, too radical to be realistic.

[Harlan Huckleby]

complete withdrawal of the U.S. from the mideast. Who does he think will move in (China)

China won't be stupid enough to get into the Middle East. Perhaps this is what you are saying.

I agree that Ron Paul offers fantasy land solutions.

But that's what we've come to expect from Texas. Ross Perot and his volunteers, ready to fix things.

[Joemailman]

I'm not actually for Paul, but I find his candor refreshing. I think it would be interesting to have a debate with the Republican candidates minus Paul, with Paul asking the questions.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I like Paul OK. He is a man of ideas. Unfortunately one of his ideas is isolationism, which isn't so realistic.

He was the Libertarian candidate for Presdent last election, that's problem where he belongs.