At this rate in Iraq... - Page 6 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-13-2003, 12:34 PM   #76
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Rono's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: the Netherlands
Posts: 6,163
Local Time: 10:36 AM
double post,...sorry.
__________________

__________________
Rono is offline  
Old 07-17-2003, 12:29 AM   #77
Refugee
 
Red Ships of Scalla-Festa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: your skull
Posts: 2,311
Local Time: 03:36 AM
saw on cbc tonite how soldier moral is really low, and how one soldier said that if rumsfeld came to iraq, hed ask him to resign.

another soldier said rumsfeld and bush belong in the deck of cards.

way to go administration.
__________________

__________________
Red Ships of Scalla-Festa is offline  
Old 07-17-2003, 03:02 PM   #78
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Basstrap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 10,726
Local Time: 07:06 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Red Ships of Scalla-Festa
saw on cbc tonite how soldier moral is really low, and how one soldier said that if rumsfeld came to iraq, hed ask him to resign.

another soldier said rumsfeld and bush belong in the deck of cards.

way to go administration.
I saw that!
very interesting piece
__________________
Basstrap is offline  
Old 07-19-2003, 01:12 AM   #79
Refugee
 
Red Ships of Scalla-Festa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: your skull
Posts: 2,311
Local Time: 03:36 AM
yes, and now it looks like theyre going to get in trouble for it to!

dont question the thief's authority!
__________________
Red Ships of Scalla-Festa is offline  
Old 07-19-2003, 04:15 AM   #80
ONE
love, blood, life
 
FizzingWhizzbees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the choirgirl hotel
Posts: 12,614
Local Time: 09:36 AM
So when a person signs up for the US military they sign over their right to hold political opinions that differ with those of the President?
__________________
FizzingWhizzbees is offline  
Old 07-19-2003, 03:17 PM   #81
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
sulawesigirl4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,416
Local Time: 04:36 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by FizzingWhizzbees
So when a person signs up for the US military they sign over their right to hold political opinions that differ with those of the President?
Apparently so. if you read this article from the AP

Quote:
Griping Could Mean Charges for Soldiers

..."Every now and then we've got to look at our young people and understand why they said what they said, and then do something about it," said Gen. John Abizaid, head of U.S. Central Command.

He said it was up to the soldiers' direct commanders to decide if they should be punished.

"None of us that wear this uniform are free to say anything disparaging about the secretary of defense, or the president of the United States," he added.
__________________
"I can't change the world, but I can change the world in me." - Bono

sulawesigirl4 is offline  
Old 07-19-2003, 04:00 PM   #82
ONE
love, blood, life
 
FizzingWhizzbees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the choirgirl hotel
Posts: 12,614
Local Time: 09:36 AM
That's disgraceful. I could understand that soldiers might not be able to discuss *some* subjects with the press (ie it's obvious that they can't say "we'll be in city X tomorrow" in the middle of a war) but for them to be punished for expressing an opinion is wrong. Does anyone know if the person who gave that quote ("None of us who wear this uniform are free to say anything disparaging about the secretary of defense, or the president of the United States.") is actually saying that this is a rule in the military or he is simply expressing a personal opinion?
__________________
FizzingWhizzbees is offline  
Old 07-20-2003, 11:14 AM   #83
Blue Crack Addict
 
MissVelvetDress_75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: basking in my post-concert glow still mesmerized by the orbit of his hips..Also Holding Bono Close as he requested.
Posts: 25,776
Local Time: 04:36 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by FizzingWhizzbees
So when a person signs up for the US military they sign over their right to hold political opinions that differ with those of the President?
when i saw that piece that the ABC reporter did on US Solider moral and the response by the general who said that they will be punished for making those remarks never in a million years did i feel the anger that i felt at that moment. i honestly wanted to throw something at my tv. what the hell soliders are not allowed to voice their own opinion? moral is low. with US soliders being killed daily by guerillas it is no wonder they are feeling this way. i am getting tired of seeing daily reports of a solider being killed and watching the death rate go up.

not only was i angered about that but i was mad at this apparent smear campaign that had been "launched" by the drudge report and the white house to discredit this report simply because he is openly gay.
__________________
MissVelvetDress_75 is offline  
Old 07-20-2003, 11:31 AM   #84
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 04:36 AM
In my opinion the soldiers should be punished. They know the rules. When you join the service, you give away some of the rights and freedoms that the rest of America gets to enjoy the benefits of. One of the rules that is drilled into your head from your first day in basic training is that there is a chain of command. You DO NOT go outside of the chain of command with issues. If these soldiers have issues, they should address them to their superior officer within the chain of command. When I heard of the report my immediate reaction was, what are these soldiers thinking speaking with the reporter like that.

My goodness, my grandfather was away from my grandmother for five years during WWII. This is part of the JOB that they VOLUNTEERED for.

Having worn the uniform, I have very little sympathy here. They were not using their heads.

Now, were they not wearing the uniform, in their civilian clothes, on a street corner here in the states using their 1st Amendment Rights, that would be different. I would be right there with you all.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 07-20-2003, 11:53 AM   #85
ONE
love, blood, life
 
FizzingWhizzbees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the choirgirl hotel
Posts: 12,614
Local Time: 09:36 AM
I can understand your argument Dread, but I just have one question: Isn't it a good thing if people in the US know how many soldiers serving in Iraq feel about this situation? I would have thought that people in the US would want to have this information so they could continue to make informed judgements about whether the war should have happened/has been successful/is resulting in the US getting 'bogged down' in Iraq, etc. It would be nice if the most senior people in the military were entirely honest about the morale of the soldiers serving in Iraq, but sadly I think there's a good chance they would claim morale is good even when they are aware it is low. Isn't it a good thing that people know how soldiers in Iraq feel about their work there?
__________________
FizzingWhizzbees is offline  
Old 07-20-2003, 11:59 AM   #86
New Yorker
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA USA
Posts: 2,551
Local Time: 02:36 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
In my opinion the soldiers should be punished. They know the rules. When you join the service, you give away some of the rights and freedoms that the rest of America gets to enjoy the benefits of. One of the rules that is drilled into your head from your first day in basic training is that there is a chain of command. You DO NOT go outside of the chain of command with issues. If these soldiers have issues, they should address them to their superior officer within the chain of command.
Dread, a soldier being frustrated with the current presidential administration is different than a soldier having issues with, for example, his or her commanding officer over the manner in which he or she is treated by said commanding officer. If your commanding officer is sadistically pistol whipping you just for the hell of it, of course you take it up the chain of command. But that's a helluva lot different than simply expressing one's opinion about the current presidential administration.

A soldier is entitled to have views differing from the administration. The comment by the General that soldiers are not free to say "anything disparaging about the secretary of defense, or the president of the United States" is ridiculous.
__________________
pub crawler is offline  
Old 07-20-2003, 03:16 PM   #87
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 04:36 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by pub crawler

Dread, a soldier being frustrated with the current presidential administration is different than a soldier having issues with, for example, his or her commanding officer over the manner in which he or she is treated by said commanding officer. If your commanding officer is sadistically pistol whipping you just for the hell of it, of course you take it up the chain of command. But that's a helluva lot different than simply expressing one's opinion about the current presidential administration.
Not so. You are partially correct, however, you are a soldier in the chain of command. The President is #1 then the Secretary of Defence follows down to the lowliest soldier in the chain of command. You do not have a right, while in uniform to go out to a reporter and criticize them publicly. They are part of the Chain of Command. You do not have a right while in uniform to say anything disparaging about them. You can be Court Martialled under the United States Code of Military Justice for such an offence.

Quote:
Originally posted by pub crawler
A soldier is entitled to have views differing from the administration. The comment by the General that soldiers are not free to say "anything disparaging about the secretary of defense, or the president of the United States" is ridiculous.
Yes, a soldier is allowed to have different opinions. They are not allowed to express them while wearing the Uniform of the United States Armed Forces. It is not rediculous, General Douglas MacArthur, was FIRED for publically criticizing President Truman in 1951 over Korea.

Again, these soldiers have been active since September. I think it is WRONG given our history in WWI and WWII to bitch publically to reporters, when others who DID NOT volunteer and were drafted, served overseas for much longer periods of time. I also would like to know if ABC and Peter Jennings went and interviewed soldiers in Bosnia when Clinton promised them that they would only be there for 6 months. I am pretty sure they did not.

ABC was well aware that the soldiers they had interviewed were acting innapropriately. If they gave a about them, and were interested in giving the American public a view into the moral of the troops they could very easily have not used their names and just played the audio. But Peter Jennings summed it up like this:

[Q]"We've had a lot of questions in the last 24 hours about whether soldiers are permitted to publicly criticize their mission or their superiors, as some did on this program last night. Officially, a soldier could be court-martialed for this, although it is rare and at the discretion of his commander. We were reminded today of a common refrain from drill sergeants to their troops: 'We are here to defend democracy, not to practice it.' Those soldiers who lashed out on this broadcast about the Pentagon are based at Fort Stewart in Georgia. It was, as we've said, a very unusual outburst.[/Q]

The part that I put into bold is word for word what we learned in Basic Training. When you go into the service, you truly give up part of your rights. I have been unexpectedly called to duty. I have packed my bags being told I am leaving for another country in 24 hours. I remember rounds of drinks being bought for myself and my fellow NCO's by the Command Sergent Major as a good-bye present because we were supposed to be leaving for Hati. President Clinton was not my favorite person that night as I made a phone call to my wife to say good-bye from what was supposed to be a 48 hour drill weekend. Shoot, I totally disagreed with the policy. The laughable part of the whole thing was the leader they wanted to install in Hatti was staying at the Ritz-Carlton Boston at the time, where I worked. Think I wanted to go to Hatti and die, while the future leader was living it up at the Ritz?

I signed my name on a line to serve and follow lawful orders not stand up and speak out against them.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 07-20-2003, 04:35 PM   #88
New Yorker
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA USA
Posts: 2,551
Local Time: 02:36 AM
Fair enough, Dread. You're argument is well-stated and well-reasoned, so I won't debate you any further on this issue. In other words, if the facts you've listed are accurate (and I don't have any reason to believe they aren't), then I agree with you.

I will say, however, that -- in my opinion -- in some ways it doesn't make sense to compare the Gulf Wars I & II to WWI & WWI. The world was a different place back then. Our actions in Iraq are much more nebulous in terms of their justification than were the World Wars.
__________________
pub crawler is offline  
Old 07-21-2003, 02:04 PM   #89
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 09:36 AM
Yeah, fair enough, Dread. If the soldiers sign up with this understanding they shouldn't break the rules. But I think Fizz has a good point. How do they tell morale is crummy if the soldiers don't talk? Or if they have problems do they talk to someone in their chain of command? I'm asking this as someone who has no idea how to deal with morale issues in the military. I'm confused.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 07-21-2003, 02:08 PM   #90
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 10:36 AM
Dreadsox: I understand completely that during military action there is no time to debate, but in other sitiuations, with that mentality ( 'We are here to defend democracy, not to practice it.') it is extremely easy to abuse the soldiers
__________________

__________________
Klaus is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com