September 30, 2007
RED 6 ON THE WAY
A certain Silver Star recipient former tanker Indian type is in the car headed our direction. It's been two years since we've seen
him, so it should be a good day. Too cool.
Posted by: Sarah at
07:08 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 43 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Tell N.P. to self publish! He's a brilliant story
teller and I miss his blog.
Posted by: MaryIndiana at October 03, 2007 04:43 PM (82AdA)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
September 11, 2007
9/11 CHANGED EVERYTHING
I just heard Herman Cain on the radio, asking callers to call in and say where they were on 9/11/01 and how it changed their lives. I started thinking about what I'd say if I called in. I've said all this stuff before on the blog, but it's worth summarizing today.
On 9/11/01 I was a stupid kid who didn't know a thing about the world. I hated politics, put my fingers in my ears any time someone mentioned Israel, and was shockingly naive about how deep the world's hatred for my country ran. I was at school that day and was annoyed that my fellow classmates all wanted to go home; I thought they all just wanted an excuse for a day off. New York was 800 miles away, so there was no reason we couldn't continue with our lessons. I was engaged to a guy in Army ROTC, and the severity of 9/11 still didn't sink in. In short, I was a complete idiot.
Today I started thinking that if 9/11 hadn't happened, my life would be quite different. My husband was slated to join the Army for four years of Finance. My guess is that he would've completed his commitment and taken his business mind elsewhere for more money. Certainly he wouldn't have stayed in and chosen to learn Farsi. We'd probably be somewhere in the Midwest, working and living like most of our peers.
Although I was too obtuse and self-absorbed to realize it at the time, 9/11 changed everything for me.
And 9/11 changed the blogging world too. Early in the morning of 9/11/01, Steven den Beste wrote a post about online gambling. Guess what he posted on the rest of the week, and more or less for the rest of his blogging career. If it weren't for the path that he and others like him forged, I might still be sitting with my fingers in my ears.
Without 9/11, I never would've learned to think.
Posted by: Sarah at
07:23 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 337 words, total size 2 kb.
September 07, 2007
300
The husband and I had a talk tonight, about going to war, about being left behind, about duty, honor, and glory. I shed a tear, we shared an embrace...and then we watched
300. It is such a fitting thing, to watch
300. And nothing gets to me like Queen Gorgo's
speech:
I am not here to represent Leonidas; his actions speak louder than my words ever could. I am here for all those voices which cannot be heard: mothers, daughters, fathers, sons - three hundred families that bleed for our rights, and for the very principles this room was built upon. We are at war, gentlemen. We must send the entire Spartan army to aid our king in the preservation of not just ourselves, but of our children. Send the army for the preservation of liberty. Send it for justice. Send it for law and order. Send it for reason. But most importantly, send our army for hope - hope that a king and his men have not been wasted to the pages of history - that their courage bonds us together, that we are made stronger by their actions, and that your choices today reflect their bravery.
We are made stronger by their actions.
Posted by: Sarah at
04:09 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 207 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Man, that speech was the best part of the movie.
P.S. I don't live near a Michael's. We only have Hobby Lobby.
Posted by: Erin at September 07, 2007 06:48 PM (XRza7)
2
I LOVE that movie. And I agree with Erin, that's the best part of the movie.
Posted by: Green at September 07, 2007 07:05 PM (VqW06)
3
That movie was so awesome. Our entire theater gave it a standing ovation in the end.
Posted by: airforcewife at September 08, 2007 03:33 AM (emgKQ)
4
That's Jim's favorite movie
We went and saw it at the local IMAX theatre.
Posted by: Kate at September 10, 2007 11:51 AM (tB/4l)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
SMARTS AIN'T ALWAYS THE ANSWER
Miss Ladybug writes a
nice post explaining her take on an article about why we need the draft. She does a good job of explaining her side. I have one thing to add about this part in
the original article:
Consequently, we have a severe talent deficiency in the military, which the draft would remedy immediately. While America’s bravest are in the military, America’s brightest are not. Allow me to build a squad of the five brightest students from MIT and Caltech and promise them patrols on the highways connecting Baghdad and Fallujah, and I’ll bet that in six months they could render IED’s about as effective as a “Just Say No” campaign at a Grateful Dead show.
First of all, my husband just whooped MIT's butt at that Fast Money MBA Challenge, and he went to a state school and chose to be in the Army. So I'm thinking he could do just as well at "patrols on the highways" as Ivy Leaguers could. Hell, he would do better since he wants to be there instead of being forced to be there; I don't care how smart you were at school, if you don't have the drive and desire to apply your brain power to a problem, you ain't gonna fix it either.
But secondly, and here's my real contribution, smarter doesn't always make you a better soldier. My husband likes to tell one anecdote: The guy in their company with the highest ASVAB score, so presumably the smartest soldier, was the one my husband had to put in jail in Iraq. The best soldier they had, the one everyone wanted to work with, was the old gangbanger.
There are plenty of smart people in the military; I'd rather talk to Jack Army about the Middle East than anyone at Caltech. But book smarts isn't always what the Army needs, especially if it's been forced to be there. Somehow I get a little giggle imagining this Marine corporal trying to organize a squad of drafted Ivy Leaguers. I'm not sure it'd go as swimmingly as he thinks it would.
Posted by: Sarah at
03:07 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 360 words, total size 2 kb.
1
point well-taken; well put.
Posted by: prophet at September 07, 2007 04:24 AM (Yagmr)
2
I have to agree. As a retired Infantryman I always found the enlisted braniacs as being the most difficult soldiers. The guys who may not have been the brightest, but understood why they were in the Army, and had a good does of stick-to-itivness where always the best soldiers.
The only thing the draft does is give you an unmotivated soldier who doesn't want to be there, and will endanger his comrades with his attitude.
Posted by: James at September 07, 2007 07:03 AM (DxgIR)
3
I'm sure there are a lot of smart people in the Army, and I bet that a lot of creative solutions have been developed in the field. But not all problems are susceptible for field solutions--for some things, you need laboratories and factories. In WWII, for example, a soldier on the scene came up with the device for clearing the hedgerows of Normandy. But when it came to shooting down V-1 cruise missiles, it required the work of a Bell Labs scientist (based, interestingly, on an idea that came to him in a dream) and the collective output of several manufacturing plants.
The deficiency we have right now is neither brainpower in the front lines, nor brainpower back home--it is, rather, effective coordination to bring our industrial and technological power to bear on the problem. I have long felt that we need to have a Director of Industrial Mobilization to help establish priorities and cut through red tape. This individual should ideally be a respected retired executive who is afraid of nothing and nobody.
Here's an interesting post about
GI ingenuity, both in the present war and WWII.
Posted by: david foster at September 07, 2007 11:51 AM (gguM0)
4
That does irritate me - the "smart" thing. I'm not sure how to politely discuss it, because my immediate inference was that it means the people in the military are dumb. Or, at least, not as smart as they could be.
Of course, I could be sensitive about that, seeing has how my husband is pretty durn smart himself, smart enough to have fluency in two languages which do not share an alphabet. And a few other things, too.
I don't agree with a draft, because I don't want to return to the Vietnam era of soldiering. However, I do get very frustrated that so many do so little, and so few do so much.
Posted by: airforcewife at September 07, 2007 12:50 PM (emgKQ)
5
What do I know about the Middle East? Now, if you want to discuss... uh... what do I know?
Posted by: JACK ARMY at September 10, 2007 02:18 AM (cxPqT)
6
This is a very old subject. When Halberstam wrote
The Best and The Brightest, it was a poke in the eye of the intellectualoids. As Sam Rayburn quipped at the time,
I'd feel a whole lot better if one of them had run for county sheriff once.
WFB hit the same not when he observed that he'd rather be governed by the first 1500 names in the Boston telephone directory, than the faculty of Harvard, because the intellectualoids vote for utopianism, and the hunt for perfecting mankind in the 20th century has led us from the death camps, to the gulags, to the killing fields, and one might say, to the desert.
Finally, Leo delivers a great Howard Hughes line in
The Aviator, "I've had those ivy league pricks looking down their noses at me all my life."
Posted by: Casca at September 10, 2007 06:13 AM (xGZ+b)
7
Reading your post and these comments, what am I supposed to think as a proud Ivy League (Columbia U) graduate and a proud (enlisted Army) veteran?
I say that half-kiddingly. You know as well as anyone that today's soldiers must wear many different hats and our victory in the Long War demands that they achieve far more than the traditional soldiers' tasks, which in and of themselves, already require plenty of brains. In the Long War, they have to be peace-builders, too, which requires that they take on everything else.
I oppose the premise that the only way to get Ivy Leaguers to serve is the draft. Sadly, not just anti-military activists, but also too many military supporters promote that notion. We should be finding ways to constructively overcome the prejudices of the civil-military divide. I ask that you take care to avoid adding credence to the notion that being an Ivy Leaguer and serving in the military is an either/or proposition. Doing so only adds to the gaps in our society in a time when our nation needs unity of society and purpose.
Indeed, there is a substantial number of Ivy Leaguers, at least at Columbia University, who have served before attending college or will serve upon graduation. (EG, google the "U.S. Military Veterans of Columbia University" and the "Hamilton Society", Columbia's cadets and officer candidates campus group.)
Our military needs more people - bottom-line - in this arduous, complex war. Our presently serving soldiers need the help, and the talent, smarts, and potential on Ivy League campuses are undeniable. Just as Ivy Leaguers once were successfully recruited into war-time efforts like the OSS without being forced, we should be finding better ways today to recruit Ivy Leaguers to invest their abilities into the special challenges of this war.
The idea is for Ivy Leaguers to be force multipliers, to work alongside their fellow Americans, like your husband and all our other exceptional troops, not displace them.
Posted by: Eric Chen at September 11, 2007 07:48 PM (JlyXZ)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
September 06, 2007
BECAUSE HE WENT TO WAR
Families Cracking Under War Pressure
Sigh.
Love My Tanker does a good job of fisking this article. I will just point out a few things, less diplomatically than she does.
"I don't know one military family that is still together or anything like they were before the Soldier in the family went to war," 30-year-old Mylinda, whose husband was among the first Marines to be deployed in Iraq, told AFP.
We're still together and exactly the same as we were before. Only better. My husband has matured as a man, as a leader, and as a citizen. He is a far better person for having been to war because he now understands things that most of us only know from books. If he's changed at all, it's for the better. Me too, for I had to spend a year being self-reliant, not whiny, and strong.
"Now, you have boy scouts fighting over there. They get kids out of high school, put them in boot camp and then send them to fight.
"When they get out, all they know how to do is kill someone."
Yes, my husband now knows how to kill someone. He also knows how to talk to people about electricity, gas shortages, getting along with their neighbors, and training to be soldiers themselves. Because he went to war, he changed career paths and now is learning to speak their language so he can continue to talk to them about how to make their countries better. Talk to them. If he was just going to kill them, he wouldn't need to waste six months learning to speak their language.
My husband is a better person because he's been to war, and we're a stronger couple because of it. Better. Maybe you could interview someone like us next time.
MORE:
FbL points out that this article got picked up at Islam Online under the title "Unseen American Victims of Iraq." Great.
Posted by: Sarah at
01:00 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 332 words, total size 2 kb.
1
"They get kids out of high school..."
Apparently Mylinda gets her idiocy from her own mother (who made that statement). I guess Mylinda's mom never figured out that... the military has ALWAYS let 18 year olds enlist directly out of high school... With a statement like that, the rest of the article loses any and all meaning.
But since it's by the French news agency, I expected no less. I'm just wondering why military.com felt compelled to carry such a stupid article.
There are many complaints that can be made about the military, legitimate complains, not this kind of tripe!
Posted by: Teresa at September 06, 2007 03:40 PM (rVIv9)
2
How about military.com post an article like this, "Troops and Families Cracking Under the Strain of Stupid Media W***e Outlets"
Posted by: airforcewife at September 06, 2007 03:47 PM (emgKQ)
3
""About three-quarters of the veterans acknowledged having some family problem at least once a week.""
What constitutes a "family problem"? If it's just a disagreement, then my hubby and I fall into that category and he's not military! That is a very vague statement.
Posted by: Tracy at September 06, 2007 04:54 PM (wFSe9)
4
Thanks for the laugh, Sarah. I love it. The Army is now responsible for happy or unhappy marriages. We are the great, the powerful, OZ! She's entitled to her viewpoint, but I would be very interested to hear her husband's side of the story. I'm guessing it would be something about her whining all the time and nothing was ever her fault?
Boy, and the mother - she makes it sound like we're loading up flatbed trucks with crying boys in boy scout uniforms. Guess she forgot to mention that $20,000 bonus and the VOLUNTEER part of it. Very small brain pans on those two.
Posted by: Oda Mae at September 06, 2007 09:00 PM (I0e9i)
5
"They get kids out of high school..."
Following on from Teressa's point above: this one has always irritated me. Suppose they work at McDonald's for a month then sign up, would that be ok? What about two months?
Here in Britain the usual one is "He had only been out of basic training for 3 months when he died". Yes, its tragic when someone is killed before they have the chance to make something of themselves, but what do the media suggest? We keep them in a depot for three months (with the attendant 'skill fade'...) first? Maybe six months? Then you'd just get articles saying "He was only six months out of basic training..." or "He was only one month out of depot...".
At some age society accepts you are old enough to decide what you want to do. Some people choose to join the army. The army decides how much training you need before you can be sent to war - there is no possible benefit in under-training you if they need the job done. Once you have completed that you are ready (well, in so far as you ever will be).
Anyway, rant over. Hi, Sarah, I've been reading your blog for a few years now. Did you know you have an international military audience?
Posted by: RGT at September 06, 2007 11:50 PM (6lVxB)
6
"International military audience" makes me feel so exotic!
Posted by: Sarah at September 07, 2007 02:27 AM (TWet1)
7
Thanks for the link, Sarah!
Not only did it get picked up, but it got "edited for clarity," too. Very, very ugly.
Posted by: FbL at September 07, 2007 08:28 AM (TXlt9)
8
Well said, Sarah!
Posted by: LMT at September 09, 2007 05:09 AM (ASoq0)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
63kb generated in CPU 0.0229, elapsed 0.1304 seconds.
50 queries taking 0.1087 seconds, 190 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.