May 26, 2004
May 25, 2004
MISLEADING
If you didn't see Iraq Now's comparison of
misleading media quotes on Instapundit, you should read it.
Posted by: Sarah at
05:00 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 19 words, total size 1 kb.
ANONYMOUS
It has been a while since I first read the
Americans Anonymous webpage, but thanks to
Amritas I returned to it this evening. What a great site.
(Oh and yes, despite what I said before about using my French to read things in the original, I'd give anything to not speak French today so I wouldn't be able to understand this magazine cover.)
Posted by: Sarah at
04:49 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 65 words, total size 1 kb.
ROCKY IV
I've almost made it through
the full cycle, so tonight was Rocky IV.
I didn't really live through the Cold War. I mean, I did, but not in the way my parents did. I vaguely remember the Wall coming down, but it didn't really mean that much to me as a 12 year old. However, I do remember the era's movies. Superman IV. War Games. Rocky IV. I distinctly remember seeing these movies, and I remember feeling scared about the bad guys and cheering for the good guys.
We don't have movies like that anymore.
Lileks recently wrote that he'd like to see them make a movie about 9/11. I would too, but it'll never happen.
I think people would like these stories to be told, but we canÂ’t have war movies anymore unless itÂ’s an old war, or one that happened in some place with an oversupply of consonants. ItÂ’s not that Hollywood is unpatriotic or wishes America to lose; theyÂ’d bristle at the charge. But they want Bush to lose first and foremost, and after that weÂ’ll see what happens. To make a movie about The War admits that there is a war, and sometimes I think a third of the country rejects this notion out of hand. WeÂ’re only at war because Bush made us go to war! or weÂ’re only at war because we donÂ’t let Interpol handle it! or some such delusion. I swear: there are people who see the conflict in such narrow terms that if Bush on 9/11 had announced he was forcing Israel back to pre-67 borders, and the hijackers had heard the news in the cockpit, they would have hit the autopilot and let the planes resume their original course.
So what happens in Rocky IV? The Soviets challenge the Americans to a boxing match, and Apollo takes the bait. In the press conference, the reporters boo the Soviets for claiming they could beat Apollo Creed. Let me repeat that: the reporters boo the Soviets. Apollo dies, Rocky trains (and gets more muscle than humanly possible), and the arena is filled with Drago supporters for the big fight. Rocky holds his own, and suddenly the Soviets are cheering for Rocky. Rocky breaks Drago, and then he takes the mic and tells the Soviets they can change and the crowd goes wild.
Propaganda? Of course so. But it's a plot we all wanted to see at the time.
Our movies were optimistic. We thought we were the good guys and we wrote movies where the bad guys wanted to be us in the end. The Soviets cheer Rocky. He said he learned to like them and maybe they could learn to like him, and the crowd went wild. And when Rocky shook his American flag (which apparently is a no-no in 2004) the Soviets cheered and the Politboro stood up and clapped.
Look, I know it's just a movie, but movies influence our thinking. I strongly believe that those who fought back against the terrorists on Flight 93 would never have done so if they hadn't been raised on movies like Passenger 57 and Air Force One. What will our kids be raised on if they never see movies about the brave folks on 9/11 or the courageous soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan? We need a made-for-TV movie about Pat Tillman, not Jessica Lynch. Don't give us the victim-hero; give us the hero-hero. If our kids grow up on Fahrenheit 9/11 and the movie about Richard Clarke's book, we'll be in deep trouble in twenty years.
We made Cold War movies during the Cold War, but I don't think we'll see one War on Terrorism movie anytime soon. I think that's a travesty.
MORE TO GROK:
More above.
Posted by: Sarah at
04:14 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 630 words, total size 4 kb.
1
We've got the Moore movie on 9/11 coming out - but I somehow don't think that counts.
Somebody will make a 'real' movie on 9/11. And the big shots in Hollywood will refuse to distribute it. And somebody else will, and will make a fortune ('The Passion' ring any bells? Mel - are you listening?)
Posted by: Glenmore at May 25, 2004 10:55 PM (6EPo+)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
SILENCE
The phone rang while I was finishing up that last post, and I was shocked to hear my husband's voice on the other end. It was a wonderful call -- no static, hardly any delay, lots of laughter -- until five minutes passed and the line went dead. That was when I realized I hadn't heard his voice in over three weeks, and the silence at the end of the line hurt my heart more than anything I can think of.
This wouldn't be so hard if I got to hear from him more often than twice a month.
Posted by: Sarah at
12:26 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 101 words, total size 1 kb.
PRINCIPLES
I really enjoyed reading
Cathy Young's article today. She discusses the "my country, right or wrong" mentality and brings up some interesting points. She and I have common ground, so I was able to start thinking critically about what she said at the end of her article:
Ironically, the same conservatives who believe that no decent American can sympathize with the other side during a war also generally believe that our troops in Iraq deserve the support of the Iraqis because we liberated them from an evil regime. Yet, following their logic, patriotic Iraqis would have had to support a homegrown tyrant over foreign occupation.
That is true, and I need to keep that in mind whenever I can't understand why many Iraqis are not overjoyed that we're there. I also found the corresponding Instapundit post -- perhaps the longest string of words Reynolds has ever uttered -- to be equally interesting:
I'm not a "my country, right or wrong," guy. But I do think that if patriotism means anything it means giving one's own country the benefit of the doubt -- of which, in the case of this war, there's not really much need for -- and that the people I was discussing in that post are doing quite the opposite and adopting a "my country -- of course it's wrong" attitude. To root for your own country's defeat is to separate yourself from its polity, to declare it not worth saving or preserving, to declare the lives of its soldiers less important than your own principles. It's not always wrong, but it's a very a drastic step, as drastic as deciding to mount a revolution, really, and yet it's often taken by superficial people for superficial -- and, as in this case, tawdry and self-serving -- reasons. [emphasis mine]
I completely agree with the Instapundit here. Many people these days don't seem to ever give the US the benefit of the doubt, and I have little patience for people who root against the US. But the phrase in bold particularly struck me: Isn't that what we all do? On both sides? On the one, we have the loonies on the Left who don't care how many lives we have to waste as long as Bush is no longer president:
The only way to get rid of this slime bag WASP-Mafia, oil barron ridden cartel of a government, this assault on Americans and anything one could laughingly call "a democracy", relies heavily on what a shit hole Iraq turns into. They need to die so that we can be free. Soldiers usually did that directly--i.e., fight those invading and harming a country. This time they need to die in defense of a lie from a lying adminstration to show these ignorant, dumb Americans that Bush is incompetent. They need to die so that Americans get rid of this deadly scum.
On the other hand, you have people like me who think that no matter how many soldiers we lose and how many memorial services we have to have here on post, we need to persevere and set things right in the Middle East. So, in some sense, we both feel that our principles outweigh the soldiers' lives.
Trust me, I think there's a whopping difference between the two, but in a way the soldiers are being used by both sides. In a way. I'm not sure if I like that thought.
Posted by: Sarah at
11:34 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 572 words, total size 4 kb.
1
It is interesting to me that the Left have this attitude, but perhaps it's the Marxist mentality that drives that. Funny, I don't remember anyone wishing death upon someone else simply because Jimmy Carter was incompetent.
Posted by: Mike at May 25, 2004 01:04 PM (cFRpq)
2
I agree Mike. I didn't wish death and destruction on anyone in the previous admin.(they shall not be named), I just wanted them to go away!
Sarah,
It all boils down to if you believe our being in the ME is a good thing or a bad thing. I'm with you in supporting our troops, AND why they are there! OT, I'm hearing some good rumblings on the net lately that the silent majority are about ready to not be so silent any more. Maybe it's the "Bill Whittle" effect! Hoorah!
Posted by: MargeinMI at May 26, 2004 09:19 AM (iB+r3)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
DRIPPING
I'm with
Den Beste today on the media bias. Since
the networks thought our President was less important than Fear Factor, and since he spoke in the middle of the night, I had to try to find the transcript of his speech today. I did manage to find
this MSNBC article that's positively dripping with disdain. You can hear the
liberal bias that Tim wrote about:
President Bush, seeking to convince skeptical Americans that he has a plan to bring stability to Iraq, outlined a five-step program calculated to articulate his objective of a sovereign Iraqi government, and to begin to reverse the damaging fallout over U.S. soldiersÂ’ abuse of Iraqi prisoners.
Positively dripping. It gets even worse when they talk about his poll ratings.
Posted by: Sarah at
03:49 AM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 127 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Here's the link to the speech:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/05/20040524-10.html
Posted by: Carey Gage at May 25, 2004 07:44 AM (1gCUK)
2
So what about channels like Fox News? Do you think they are unbiased? Or are they biased in the conservative direction?
Posted by: Taybin Rutkin at May 26, 2004 05:26 PM (ac+Q0)
3
Wow Sarah! A SDB link! I guess you really ARE part of the blogosphere! Congrats!
To TB: Yes, I believe they are, but just a small (and growing) other end of the spectrum from the last 30 years or so. Should AMERICAN media be somewhat biased, somewhat treasonest or just report the facts in this country of free press? The only reason they are free is because they are in this country. Not that that should make them biased TOWARD American policy, but at least neutral? That's NOT what I see from major media (excluding the Wall Street Journal most of the time). What I see these days is the media leaning (who are we kidding...building a castle for the leftist agenda) to the left. If some people are using the same media to say something different, what's your problem with that? Isn't that exactly one of the things this country is about?! FREEDOM OF SPEECH. Even if you disagree with it. Yes, FoxNews leans right. Sorry if you have a problem with it. I've had a problem with Peter, Dan and Tom for a very long time now. I don't even watch Fox that often, but I'm sure glad it's FINALLY there to tweak the American mind.
Thanks Sarah for the use of your bandwith to unload on this a**hat.
God Bless America
Posted by: MargeinMI at May 26, 2004 08:56 PM (HcuSk)
4
I agree: no media source is unbiased. However, many people I know persist in saying that Fox is the only biased channel, which is naive and uninformed. Why do people look down their noses at a channel that dares to give the President and the USA the benefit of the doubt?
The sooner we admit that they're ALL biased, the better off we'll be.
Posted by: Sarah at May 27, 2004 01:13 AM (+zApI)
5
Are conservatives so inarticulate and bereft of argument that we must resort to these ancient charges of press bias instead of telling our message? If the press reports bad news, is it because they are biased or because the news is bad? If there is good news that goes unreported, well shouldn't we report it? Istead of wasting bandwidth flailing at the NYT? Good grief!
I despair for being among these people who blame the news reporters for the message of the news. And whose reaction to bearers of contrary views from within the administration is to defame them. Not to grapple with the arguments and facts, but to level personal accusations.
I feel as though I'm in a crowd of shrill unreasoning fishwives.
B
Posted by: bliffle at May 27, 2004 07:33 AM (S9SBH)
6
" Not to grapple with the arguments and facts, but to level personal accusations.
I feel as though I'm in a crowd of shrill unreasoning fishwives."
Bliffle, since you began and ended your comment with ad hominems, it's a bit hard to tell if you're seriously trying to make a point here. If you mean that "we" shouldn't object to the heavy leftward slant of the press, I think you're on shaky ground.
Should the press report that there is bad news? Well, actually I think they should report IMPORTANT news. The fact that all the news they portray as important happens to be bad for domestic and world support of the US effort, is a legitimate target for objection.
Get our message out? Great idea! Where, exactly?
Posted by: Sam_S at May 27, 2004 12:16 PM (yLRcR)
7
Right here, for instance. That's what blogs are for.
Posted by: Amritas at May 28, 2004 01:11 AM (tJj3/)
8
Anti-Americanism is on the rise. I say shut the borders, shoot our way out of other countries, stop imports and exports. Then anyone who disagrees with that ship them to wherever they feel it is better. We are Americans and have survived all these years on our own intellect and backbone. We will continue till the end to be a surviver. We are wasting time trying to bring those anti migratory idiots to prosperity.
Then we can watch a new movie
"The real survivors"
Posted by: Ron at May 28, 2004 05:43 PM (y6rB+)
9
I wish you great success, good luck and a lot of fun for the future. Maybe one day you will really be the best of all.
Posted by: Annette at December 02, 2004 07:22 AM (6CPrq)
10
I love your site. It´s really a pleasure to read through all this interesting stuff and it home.
Posted by: Peggy Sue at February 01, 2005 06:05 AM (n8oSF)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
May 24, 2004
TIM
Look, we may not get
Tim's research and voice for much longer, so if you're not spending a few minutes every day scrolling through everything he unearths, you're missing out.
Posted by: Sarah at
05:39 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 32 words, total size 1 kb.
NO SUBSTITUTE
Tim found a
humdinger of a quote today:
I think all Americans would love their country if they had to live abroad for a while. -- U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia
Amen. While living on a military post in Germany gives us Americans a taste of what Europe is like, there is no substitute for actually living the European life. And getting garbage thrown at you on the public bus. And having young boys threaten to rape you. And having your director of study abroad repeatedly tell you she hates the United States. And being banned from speaking English in the apartment you pay for by the couple who chose to host an exchange student. And being singled out and ridiculed by your teacher for daring to raise your hand and try to participate in class with your ugly American accent. And did I mention the garbage and the rape?
There was no day I loved the United States more than the day I left France.
Posted by: Sarah at
05:28 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 171 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Wow. I've seen your mentions about being miserable in France before, but I never realized how bad it was. My study abroad experience in Paris (fall '02) was nothing but wonderful. People were nice to me--admittedly, some thought I was English because I dressed better than the "other Americans." I took one (American literature) class at a French university, and the professor was sweet and always relieved to have me talk in class. Some of my peers wanted me to teach them American (rather than British) accents. When walking on the Champs-Elysees, I found an area where people had left multples bouquets and other offerings with notes saying, "We love USA--go George go."
Of course, it was only one year after Sept. 11, and before we were in Iraq. I'm not sure if I'd have the same experience there now--and given Chirac, I'm not sure I'd want to go back.
Posted by: Carla at May 25, 2004 03:16 AM (r5M6F)
2
Carla,
Why did you study American literature in France? Was there any overlap with what you already knew, or was it taught from a fresh perspective?
Posted by: Amritas at May 25, 2004 05:42 AM (0l17P)
3
Ha. I've revealed my wimpiness.
I went to France to study French, of course, and at my school (NYU in France, all American students) I took 3 classes in French. I also wanted a way to meet French students, but I wasn't confident enough in my language skills to be able to survive a course in French--so I decided to take one in English.
The course was very different from American courses on literature. We only read two books the whole semester, and concentrated on close readings of the texts with different themes each week.
Posted by: Carla at May 25, 2004 02:12 PM (r5M6F)
4
Thanks, Carla.
Nothing wimpy about what you did. At least you took classes in French at all. (It's the students who go to English-speaking countries that make me wonder why.) I'm surprised there was an American literature class in English at a French university (part of the University of Paris system, I guess). I would assume that it was for advanced French students of English.
Posted by: Amritas at May 25, 2004 04:52 PM (otoZW)
5
Yes, as I recall it was intended for 3rd-year English students. Most of them were timid about speaking English (and I tried to converse in French with them, for my own good), but they were pretty good at it--some better than others, of course. It was at Paris X, Nanterre, about 15 minutes outside the 17e arrondisement.
Posted by: Carla at May 25, 2004 08:48 PM (r5M6F)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
ACCOMPLISH
I have been trying to grok florian.
I have no idea what kind of person florian is -- man, woman, old, young -- but I know florian doesn't live in the same America I live in. I also know that we don't have any common ground, and you all know how important that is to me. I can't figure out what florian intends to accomplish here.
I'm not trying to be snarky at all; I seriously am curious why florian keeps reading my blog. I obviously care more about the American military than any other in-group I belong to, so posting links about turncoats is not going to make me re-evaluate how much I value our loyal and selfless servicemembers. Moreover, I obviously know that there are a few bad apples in the barrel, but I am absolutely certain that most servicemembers are not targeting civilians, as florian has tried to get me to admit. Every time florian comments, I tend to sigh and shake my head. I don't for one second consider re-thinking my position.
Which leads me to wonder about the in-between: I have basically given up on any hope for grey area. I see the world in black and white these days. There are good guys and bad guys; there are rights and wrongs. Researching, reading blogs, and trying to grok every day for the past eight months has been a double-edged sword: the more I learn about the world, the less likely I am to compromise on what I believe. When I am faced with looney imams, kids with AKs, and auctions of Jewish body parts on LGF every day, I am way less likely to give any credence to someone's argument that radical Islam is not the enemy. And, when faced with soldiers who organize charitable organizations, beg to return to Iraq despite the four-inch bullet hole in the forearm, and turn in their idiot buddies who torture prisoners, I am not at all likely to happily sit by and let florian sully everything they stand for. The more I read and learn, the less likely I am to be wishy-washy on my positions.
I do want to continue to grow as a person, and I do want to hear if someone disagrees with me on some details of my thoughts. But I don't learn anything from comments that are completely polar from my worldview. I could consider conceding some middle ground, but I'll never switch over to the other side. That, to me, seems to be what florian wants to accomplish.
I'm very curious, florian: why do you read my blog?
MORE TO GROK:
Florian responds in the comments, and then I respond above.
And is that really Steven Den Beste? I'm honored if it is.
Posted by: Sarah at
04:52 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 464 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Hi Sarah,
don't despair over the nutcases.....imagine mainstream American response to the Cannes Film Festival groveling before that gross pig Micael Moore....our observation here is that the "blame America first" crowd while although extremely verbal, continues to dwindle none the less. The reason is that they don't pass the smell test. Most reasonable Americans believe (rightly so I think) that most of our officials and soldiers will act in a reasonable way....i.e. reasonable people agree that the U.S. was "sucker punched" on 9-11 rather than subjugated to some wild conspiracy. Let the HAF crowd continue to make fools of themselves and the rest of us will be content by merely being proven right. Keep up the great work with your Blog Sarah....you are providing a great service!!!
Jim
APMS, AROTC, University of Southern California
Posted by: jim barclay at May 24, 2004 06:13 PM (0e6si)
2
As I read a couple of florian's comments, I wondered the same thing. The address is UK, not that it really matters. Florian simply seems to be looking for affirmation by trolling.
Posted by: Mike at May 24, 2004 08:28 PM (NZ4lg)
3
I don't doubt that you are unable to comprehend florians visits. You are quite a bit different as a person.
florian has been trying to get a rise out of you. He/she/it is not attempting to understand, or persuade, but rather to provoke a confrontation and an arguement. This serves not as an attempt to change your world view, but just as a vehicle for the arguement itself, as that is the goal. Attention, rather than understanding and growth, provocation rather than consideration.
You do not approach this medium with that outlook, you are looking to understand through reason.
Posted by: John at May 25, 2004 01:45 AM (crTpS)
4
You say you care about the US military, but I don’t think so. You think you do, but there is something else underneath it. If you did, you wouldn’t trash our soldiers by calling them “turncoats” when they decide it is their duty to tell the truth about the war. You would listen to them, the Zinnis, the Ritters, the Tagubas, the Masseys. Instead you disgrace the service of generals, of men and women who put their safety and security at risk by listening to their conscience. You say you don’t remember the Cold War, but I do, and there is a kind of a Stalinism in your ability to immediately cut down fellow soldiers and colleagues who stray from the party line.
You say you care about Israel, but I don’t think so. If you did, you would honor the “never again” spirit in the actions of these soldiers. They understand the lesson of the Holocaust -- that soldiers and civilians must never blindly follow immoral orders or support immoral policies. Staff Sgt. Massey told his CO he felt they were committing genocide --murdering civilians, desecrating bodies. His CO called him a wimp. You probably would too.
Why do I read your site?
Partly fascination. At your site people call others “conspiracy theorists” and “nutcases” even though they themselves believed in the nutty “Saddam Behind 9-11, Ready To Use WMD” conspiracy theory. At your site I see the pathology of a woman who uses the word “vaginitis” to mean cowardice, who says the life of a child holding a US passport is worth more than one who doesn’t.
Partly to monitor the war cheerleaders’ websites, the collapse of the war effort in the drop off of comments, the doublethink. To read the open diary of a war cheerleader and see the effect of, for instance, the torture policy revelation -- in your case, spontaneous crying and a recourse to Ben Gay and puppies. Then after a few days the return to the denial mode -- the “just a few idiots did it” argument.
Partly info: The great links you disagree with -- the vet turning old war posters into antiwar posters, the thoughtful antiwar writers. Strangely, you donÂ’t target extremists -- maybe because you donÂ’t see yourself as one -- but reasonable dissidence, and then I learn about them too. Thanks.
No, I wouldn’t dream of making you “switch over to the other side” -- as your admitted black-and-white worldview sees it. I do check if any light can crack through it. (By the way, a black-and-white worldview is something you share with radical Islam. They say we become what we hate.)
Posted by: florian at May 26, 2004 05:27 PM (qva6a)
5
"...the vet turning old war posters into antiwar posters..."
That would be Micah Wright, wouldn't it? Who claimed to have been in the Rangers and to have been in combat in Panama etc.?
And who was exposed recently as never having served in the military at all?
It made the WaPo:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60120-2004May1.html
And once he knew the jig was up, he confessed.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at May 29, 2004 03:34 AM (CJBEv)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
SUSPENSE
Wanna feel your heart pound? Read
this soldier's story, via
Belmont Club.
Posted by: Sarah at
02:25 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 14 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Thanks for linking to this tale of a horrible waste of life in the mess that is Iraq. A military fiasco if there ever was one.
The REAL military hero of the day is General Anthony Zinni, who has come out to reveal how senior officials at the Pentagon are guilty of dereliction of duty -- and that the time has come for heads to roll.
Posted by: florian at May 24, 2004 09:13 AM (v5x9Y)
2
Ah, Florian. I love to read your comments. What do you call this alternative universe of yours? Where black is white, and EVERYONE finds a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Oh, to have such naive certainty.
Let me guess, you probably believe that the American gov't had CIA Arab agents fly planes into the WTC to get us involved in the Middle East?
Posted by: Oda Mae at May 24, 2004 12:15 PM (kNDty)
3
If listening to Gen.Zinni and Gen.Taguba when they report on the disaster that is the Iraqi occupation is "naive certainty", I will take my chances.
By the way another American miliary hero, Staff Sgt. Jimmy Massey, has further elaborated on the war crimes and massacres of civilians he participated in. Click on the name. It is the whistleblowers and those soldiers speaking the truth that have the real guts.
Posted by: florian at May 24, 2004 02:02 PM (vcCTr)
4
"EVERYONE finds a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow."
Everyone, Oda Mae? Not Bush. No rainbows for dictators!
Posted by: Amritas at May 25, 2004 04:55 PM (otoZW)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
May 23, 2004
CRAP
I'm almost finished grading all of my students' essays, and the vile beast of plagiarism has finally reared his ugly head. I hate when they do this to me.
UPDATE:
After much stress, plagiarism, number crunching, agony, booze, and back-ache, I think I've finished grading my students' papers.
Posted by: Sarah at
08:28 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 50 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I had a student print
part of an article from the internet and turn it it. Dot matrix printer, page torn off in the middle of the sheet. He couldn't understand why I thought he hadn't written it himself.
Posted by: Mike at May 24, 2004 07:41 AM (cFRpq)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
NOPE
No wedding party. Thanks, Oda Mae.
(No time to blog: I have been slacking majorly this morning and still have 11 final papers to read.)
Posted by: Sarah at
07:26 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 27 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Your link doesn't work. Mine does. It was a wedding party, with bride, groom, children, a wedding singer. They even have the wedding video. After the massacre a soldier walked up and kicked women's bodies, seeing if they were alive, and laughing while he was doing it.
Posted by: florian at May 24, 2004 09:37 AM (v5x9Y)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
May 22, 2004
HAPPINESS
Last night at our
100 Days of Deployment party, I had a moment of pure happiness. As I was sitting next to one of my favorite wives, I looked down the dinner table at Tim and Oda Mae engaged in a conversation, and I felt so blessed. I felt overwhelmed with happiness to be surrounded by such wonderful people, and I haven't felt happier in a long time. I was one of those moments that makes it all worthwhile. I really do have a wonderful life.
Posted by: Sarah at
02:33 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 88 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I felt the same. I was so glad my husband can come over every four weeks or so, but I like to talk to other people, as I'm sure you can tell. Tim is fun!
Posted by: Oda Mae at May 22, 2004 08:00 PM (ZXIaR)
Posted by: William at December 25, 2004 11:50 AM (RUZKx)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
WMDs
(Via
Hud) No one really
cares about the WMDs after all.
(For those who get rap references, there's a WMDeezNuts joke out there somewhere...)
Posted by: Sarah at
08:17 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 26 words, total size 1 kb.
1
i have been a soldier for nearly 5 years now and have never been in a combat situation.I we should have finished what we started in the first war but that is yesterdays news i also will soon be joining my brothers in arms and i am anticipated going to do my part as a U.S.soldier but the reason i am writing is in regards to my beautiful wife who my being absent from will be so hard to deal with she is so strong and supports me like no one ever has and for that i am grateful after my first divorce i thought if the army wanted me to have a wife they would have issued me one but i would want no one else to stand by myside besides her now for all the soldiers who are enroute to war or hell same thing keep your dam head down remember there are people who believe in what we are doing and never forget what you are
I AM A SOLDIER FIGHTING IN THE FORCES WHICH GUARD MY COUNTRY AND OUR WAY OF LIFE
GO LIONS
Posted by: mark at May 22, 2004 12:38 PM (NczNv)
2
Godspeed and good luck!
Posted by: James Hudnall at May 23, 2004 01:50 AM (FV8Tp)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
HORSE
The newest installment in my segment called
Dead Horse Beating is from
James Hudnall; he says everything that I learned this morning about prison scandals in one succinct post.
Posted by: Sarah at
08:13 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 31 words, total size 1 kb.
May 21, 2004
BLAME
And here I thought we couldn't
blame anything else on President Bush...
(Thanks, Dave.)
Posted by: Sarah at
02:06 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 16 words, total size 1 kb.
1
This brings up the previous topic -- you send people out to kill civilians, and the violence comes back home. Whatever the facts of this particular case, that is the horrible blowback that America has got to expect.
Remember, Sgt. Massey's CO told him that killing civilians was "good".
Today's military hero: Staff Sgt. Camilo Mejia, brave enough to say "hell no", to stand up for what is right in the face of a war that is wrong.
Posted by: florian at May 21, 2004 06:01 AM (2/SUC)
2
There is no CO in the military who would ever tell his troops killing civilians is good...except maybe John Kerry.
I wonder if his affair was with Lynndie?
Posted by: Mike at May 21, 2004 08:20 AM (cFRpq)
3
Mike, check the Sacrement Bee article by clicking on my name for the source, Sgt. Massey telling about how his CO told me killing civilians was good, and how cluster bombs and depleted uranium are hurting US soldiers as well as Iraqis.
Turning this issue into partisan politics is pathetic.
Posted by: florian at May 22, 2004 06:14 AM (VbjXZ)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
May 20, 2004
MAY
So it
may or may not have been a wedding party, there may or may not have been sarin in those IEDs, there may or may not be an Oil-For-Food scandal, and I may or may not have just baked eighty cookies for my husband's platoon. We may never know.
Posted by: Sarah at
04:22 PM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 52 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Uncertainty is constant, because no one can be omniscient. So what prevents us from falling into total agnosticism? Why blog about the war at all if you're not actually there? And even warbloggers who are *there* are not EVERYwhere. Perhaps they and their immediate comrades may not be guilty of "war crimes" but others beyond their sight are. Why not just shut up, shut down our blogs, and vote for Kerry?
Fortunately, probability helps to counterbalance our ignorance. No, we cannot know everything. We cannot be certain. But we can determine what is and what isn't likely based on the limited clues we gather.
The trouble is that we do tend to pick and choose what clues we want to see and moreover, our probability meters are based on our own experiences. So when we think we see the outside world, we are often gazing into mirrors of our own creation.
Which mirrors reflect reality? Which ones are self-reflecting? I don't know, but at least we have a greater choice of mirrors online than we did in the old days when "news" referred to a handful of outlets. The Grey Lady is no longer the queen:
http://jameshudnall.com/archives/001944.html
Posted by: Amritas at May 20, 2004 05:45 PM (uTHHM)
2
What in the hell did that have to do with cookies?
Posted by: Erin at May 20, 2004 06:22 PM (emz9a)
3
Ha. Erin later emailed with red cheeks and said that she hadn't noticed that there was a link until after she commented. Ha.
Posted by: Sarah at May 21, 2004 02:00 AM (QXCVB)
4
Hmmm...I always thought
I was omnicient.
The posting by Wretchard is a pretty good analysis on the issue. My view is that a bunch of jihadis had a wedding party!
Posted by: Mike at May 21, 2004 08:22 AM (cFRpq)
5
http://ritalin.pills4order.com driphelpingowww
Posted by: flex at July 30, 2005 10:43 PM (YPmOQ)
6
http://check_order.finances-inco.com/check__computer--spyware/ attcheddawnheheld
Posted by: sensitive at August 13, 2005 06:53 PM (HOia2)
Posted by: casino at August 30, 2005 04:55 AM (DKl3T)
8
http://money.caclbca.org/qscerz/ heelivedsystem
Posted by: light at August 31, 2005 09:56 AM (DcMsf)
9
http://billing.acholipeace.org invisiblelisteningvulnerable
Posted by: son at September 01, 2005 10:07 PM (rSJZM)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
PRESTIGE
I very much disagree with the wording in Andrew Sullivan's
newest post:
It's very hard to know the facts about the carnage on the Iraq-Syria border, but whatever the occasion, it appears that the U.S. military was responsible for the deaths of several Iraqi women and children. It was almost certainly a mistake - either of target or of provocation. But it's another blow to the prestige of the U.S. military and their ability to avoid the kind of action which will, in fact, make their mission harder rather than easier. There are now many reports of U.S. soldiers feeling so beleaguered and jumpy that their first instinct is to fire, capture or mistreat captives. And so the cycle of distrust in some areas appears to deepen. [emphasis mine]
Blaming the military for events that make life harder for the military is a big mistake, in my opinion. They are well aware that what happened near Syria is going to be a huge problem. They are well aware that prison scandels and imprecise bombing will cause the anti-war faction to shriek. They are well aware that their every action is watched under a microscope. They don't need Andrew Sullivan to point out the blow to their prestige.
When soldiers feel that the media and the world are watching their every move, they will indeed get jumpy and nervous. The last thing we need are jumpy and nervous soldiers. If you put a basketball team out on the court and then fill the stands with hecklers and let the announcer use the mic to point out every little mistake they make, don't you think that might start to affect the team's performance at some point? That's what we do to our soldiers, only this is life-and-death, not a game of hoops.
Our soldiers know they've potentially made a huge error near Syria. Do we need to rub their faces in it over and over and point out that it's their inabilities that make the war worse?
Posted by: Sarah at
04:16 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 335 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Wars will always kill children...and adults. For some reason we value the life of a child higher than that of an adult. But in a region of the world where children are just as likely to be combatants as adults, how can that still hold?
Arabs have always cherished children, especially the first-born male. But now they use our sympathy for children against us, always pointing out their deaths regardless of circumstance. It makes me less likely to care.
Posted by: Mike at May 20, 2004 09:46 AM (cFRpq)
2
With all the stuff that they found at this house (SATCOM radio, weapons, passports, etc) I don't think there is any mistake at all. They had a mission to do and who knows maybe headed off something that would have happened if they didn't find this stuff.
The media is playing down what they accomplished and playing up the killing of "innocents".
Posted by: Machelle at May 20, 2004 09:59 AM (W/eGG)
3
Sarah,
Read Belmont Club (http://belmontclub.blogspot.com/) for a good analysis. It's not yet entirely clear what happened. BTW, I read your blog every day. Retired Army with 6 years served in Germany. Thanks for writing!
Posted by: Dana at May 20, 2004 11:55 AM (ah3a+)
4
"It's very hard to know the facts..." but I am going to proceed to be self-rightously critical, because surely that will be helpful... (/sarcasm)
It's bad whenever non-combatants get killed. What's worse is dealing with an enemy that chooses to hide weapons and tools of war in the midst of non-combatants and holy places. When you're facing that kind of enemy, things you'd rather not see happen, will happen. We don't choose the enemy's tactics- we have to deal with them.
Posted by: Jack Grey at May 20, 2004 12:10 PM (3nn57)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
103kb generated in CPU 0.0488, elapsed 0.1675 seconds.
60 queries taking 0.1458 seconds, 282 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.