GI SPECIAL
4L2:

[Thanks
to Pham Binh, Traveling Soldier, who sent this in.]
“Comments Like The Ones You Are Making Are
Working Against Us And Down-Rating Our Service”
Criticism:
From: Sander, Timothy P USA SGT USAR HHC 3D
BCT 10MTN DIV
To: GI Special
Sent: November 29, 2006 5:45 AM
Subject: Your blog
I recently stumbled upon your website while
researching information of my fallen camrades. I don't think you realize how
discouraging it is when we hear people back home making comments like
"This is how Bush brings them home," (while showing one of our
brothers in a flag-draped coffin) and "Hopeless War with no mission."
We are out here every single day trying to
help people who are less fortunate than ourselves. We are building schools and
providing medical care in addition to constantly rooting out the dangerous
terrorist cells that are scattered throughout these lands. We are extremely
proud of the sacrafices we are making to keep America safe and comments like
the ones you are making are working against us and down-rating our service.
The entire point I'm trying to make is that
many of us would love to come home, but not until we know the mission is
accomplished. Our mission here and in
Iraq have not been accomplished yet sir so please stop trying to "bring us
home now!" We are not quitters and
we will come home when the job is finished!
Thank you,
Tim P. Sander, Sgt.
345th Mobile Public Affairs Detachment
Task Force Spartan Public Affairs
Forward Operating Base Salerno, Afghanistan
DSN: 318.851.1534
“If everybody is thinking alike, then
somebody isn't thinking.”
-General George S. Patton Jr.
Response:
Sgt. Sander,
First, neither GI Special nor The Military
Project operate a blog.
GI Special is a newsletter. Most readers and contributors to the
newsletter are either serving in the armed forces; military families whose
service member relatives are still alive; Gold Star family members; veterans of
Iraq and other wars; or other members of the huge majority of Americans now
firmly and proudly opposed to the Bush regime’s program of war without
end.
Surely news of the election returns reached
Afghanistan? The notion that GI Special
can have a greater impact on troops than that event is ridiculous. Observers here from the far right to the far
left agree: the election repudiated Bush’s war policy.
In your letter, you represent as photo
captions: "This
is how Bush brings them home," and "Hopeless
War with no mission." GI
Special has never, one time, printed photos with the few words you quote as the
captions.
It may be you have been misled. The only web site maintained by the Military
Project to post GI Special newsletters is http://www.militaryproject.org. Anyone technically proficient may
go to that web site, copy material, and post it on some other website, having
forged material to suit themselves.
Perhaps the web site you visited is
maintained by some other entity that carried the photos with the most important
words omitted from the photo captions, leaving only the few words you quote, in
order, by misrepresenting what the
photo captions say, to create an impression of cold, uncaring stupidity.
Below are two examples of
photos and captions as they do appear in GI Special. Please compare the reality with the
misrepresentation of the captions reported in your letter. Note the words your complaint did not quote.
By the way, working in public affairs, and
therefore committed to reporting relevant information to those asked to give up
their lives for his government, surely you are making it known to those who
serve with you that Hamid Karzai, the suppositious head of government in
Afghanistan, is a former employee of Unocal Corporation, the parent company of
Union Oil Company of California.
Finally, isolated in Afghanistan, it is
understandable that you would not have the faintest notion of how troops in
Iraq see the war, but not understandable that you would presume to speak for
them.
You are entitled to speak for yourself; you
have no right whatever to speak for them.
They have made their views
clear.
So you may be brought up to
speed about that, three articles on that subject appear below your letter,
marked #1, #2 and #3..
Great quote from Patton. But it’s a sword that cuts two ways.
In your letter, you assert that everybody
serving in Afghanistan thinks the same way: all U.S. troops are pleased to be
there doing good for those “unfortunate” people. Thank you for the quote, confirming that, if
this is true, not only is it that “somebody isn’t thinking.”
but “somebody” has no grip on the reality of a massive, growing and
spreading insurgency, impossible without popular support, which one would hope
has not escaped the notice of those serving in public affairs.
To read why the war in Afghanistan is lost,
see: The Guerrilla In History, by Robert B
Asprey, USMC [Ret’d].
Chapter 92, on the destruction of the Russian
Army in Afghanistan, is particularly instructive. The notion that the occupation troops now in
Afghanistan (a fraction of the force deployed by the Russians) have the slightest
hope of success is a silly delusion fostered by politicians in and out of
uniform, who are more concerned with preserving their careers than they are
about the lives of those serving in the armed forces.
Asprey documents how careerist idiocy has
been a problem for Imperial armies for a few thousand years now, since Roman
legions led by politicians in uniforms were ambushed and wiped out when they
tried to occupy Gaul.
10th Mountain troops are beloved
and honored for their service by the majority of us who live in New York: far
too valuable to us all to die in either of Bush’s stupid, hopeless, incompetently
managed Imperial wars.
Come home safe.
T
REALLY
BAD IDEA:
NO MISSION;
HOPELESS WAR:
BRING THEM ALL HOME NOW

U.S. soldiers from 172nd Stryker Brigade
Combat Team at a checkpoint in Baghdad, October 26, 2006. (Namir Noor-Eldeen/Reuters)
MORE:
#1
“After Spending A Year In Iraq, I Have Found
That The Iraqis Are Not A Threat Or The Enemy”
“We Do Not Know What We Are Fighting For
Anymore; We Do Not Know What Our Mission Is”
[GI SPECIAL 4D24]
Army Times
April 24, 2006
Letters To The Editor
I am a soldier about to embark
on my second tour in Iraq.
My first tour started in November 2003. When we arrived, Saddam Hussein was on the
loose. In December, he was caught.
When I came into the military, I signed a
contract that said I would defend this country against all threats, foreign and
domestic.
After spending a year in Iraq,
I have found that the Iraqis are not a threat or the enemy. I did find that we are the threat and the
enemy to them.
They acted as we would if
someone came into America and said we are going to change your ways.
I feel this war is no longer
about taking out a threat. But I believe
it is about securing oil commerce for the future.
Securing this country and stabilizing it
would mean oil contracts and people lining their pockets with money from the
oil that my friends have been wounded for and have died for.
I hear the president speak with the press and
tell them things to appease them and to divert them to a different subject.
What I don’t see is the president
having a conference with the soldiers who have fought on the ground in Iraq.
We do not know what we are
fighting for anymore; we do not know what our mission is.
I am not alone in this
thought. My boys need to know what they
may possibly die for.
Is it for a few extra bucks for
Halliburton subsidiary KBR?
Is it about the oil?
Is it for America?
How will this war help my
family in the future?
Staff Sgt. Christopher Galka
Rainier, Wash.
MORE:
#2
72% Of U.S. Troops
Say Get Out Of Iraq By January 2007:
29% For Immediate
Withdrawal:
[GI SPECIAL 4C2]
2.28.06
Zogby.com
& John Zogby, HuffingtonPost.com.
In wars of America's century just past, we
have sent our soldiers to far-off fields of battle and were left to wonder
about their opinions of the life-and-death conflicts in which they were involved.
Letters home, and more recently telephone
calls and emails, would give us a peek into their states of mind. Some who returned would regale friends and
family with tales from the front lines.
Times have now
changed.
A first-ever survey of U.S.
troops on the ground fighting a war overseas has revealed surprising findings,
not the least of which is that an overwhelming majority of 72% of American
troops in Iraq think the U.S. should exit the country within the next year. [The poll was taken during January 2006.]
Further, a new Le Moyne
College/Zogby International survey shows that more than one in four (29%)
thought the U.S. should pull its troops immediately.
MORE:
#3
“I’d Like To Thank You For GI
Special”
[GI SPECIAL 4G11]
From: Andrew Sapp
To: GI Special
Sent: July 08, 2006
I'd like to thank you for GI
Special. I found it last year while I
was still serving in Iraq, and it helped keep me sane.
I shared stories with a number
of my buddies, and they went a long way in helping them try to make some sense
out the insanity that is Iraq.
THIS IS
HOW BUSH BRINGS THE TROOPS HOME:
BRING THEM ALL HOME NOW, ALIVE

The casket of Lance Cpl. Minhee Andy Kim of
Ann Arbor, Mich. who died while serving in Iraq, during funeral service, Nov.
15, 2006 at Arlington National Cemetery.
(AP Photo/Lawrence Jackson)
Do you have a friend or relative in the
service? Forward GI Special along, or
send us the address if you wish and we’ll send it regularly. Whether in Iraq or stuck on a base in the
USA, this is extra important for your service friend, too often cut off from
access to encouraging news of growing resistance to the war, at home and inside
the armed services. Send email requests to address
up top or write to: The Military Project, Box 126, 2576 Broadway, New York, N.Y.
10025-5657
IRAQ WAR REPORTS
Soldier
Killed In Baghdad
01 December 2006 Multi National Corps Iraq
Public Affairs Office, Camp Victory RELEASE No. 20061201-02
BAGHDAD: A Multi-National Division Baghdad Soldier was
killed during combat
operations
here Nov. 30.
U.S.
Convoy Attacked Near Samarra:
Casualties
Not Announced
01 Dec 2006
Reuters
A U.S. convoy
was attacked with machinegun fire in southwest of Samarra 100 km (60 miles)
north of Baghdad on Thursday, the U.S. military said in a statement.
Silly U.S. Commander Pretends Baqouba Hasn’t
Shut Down
12.1.06 Mideast Stars and Stripes
The commander of American and coalition
forces in Diyala province disputed reports saying the Iraqi city of Baqouba had
been "shut down" because of widespread violence this week.
Army Col. David W. Sutherland,
commander of the 3rd Heavy Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division,
acknowledged "a recent setback experienced by the Iraqi police" but
said the city is "fully operational."
The violence flared on Monday,
when insurgents attacked the Buhriz police station, scattering the policemen
assigned to it.
[How sad his talents were not
available at other important military crises.
One can hear him now, explaining that things aren’t as bad as they
look for His Majesty’s Army at Yorktown, or the Confederate Army near Appomattox,
or the German Army at Stalingrad, or the U.S. Army in Saigon. Just a few setbacks. Not to worry.
T]
AFGHANISTAN WAR REPORTS
Resistance
DVDs For Sale By Underground In Occupied Kandahar
Nov. 8 2006
Steve Chao, CTV News
KANDAHAR -- In
the busy bazaars of Kandahar City, where everything from Chinese-made bicycles,
to modern cellphones, to naan bread, hung individually on rusty nails, are for
sale, there is another steady trade that exists mostly in secret.
DVDs
showcasing so-called Taliban "victories" against NATO forces can be
bought for as little as 60 cents. They
are sold by certain store owners who quietly support the Islamic militant group.
CTV, working
with The Globe and Mail, obtained a copy of one of the latest.
TROOP NEWS
Marine Corps Rats In Command Defy Military Board:
Send War Objector To Iraq
[Thanks to Elaine Brower, The Military
Project, who sent this in.]
November 25, 2006 Associated Press
PHILADELPHIA: A Marine was deployed to Iraq this month
after a military board rejected a recommendation that he receive conscientious
objector status and a discharge.
The C.O. Status Screening Board noted that
Marine Lance Cpl. John Rogowskyj Jr. requested the status after he learned that
his Reserve unit was being sent to Iraq and suggested that the request
"was simply a means to avoid a combat deployment."
Rogowskyj, 22, was deployed Nov. 2.
"He's not supposed to be there,"
Eugene R. Fidell, the lawyer representing him in federal court in Washington,
told The Philadelphia Inquirer for Friday's newspapers.
In April, a Marine captain who served as the
hearing officer recommended the discharge.
But in August, Maj. Gen. D.V. Odell Jr.,
commander of the Fourth Marine Division, said Rogowskyj's reasoning was
"theologically confused and does not reflect any officially recognized
faith group."
[Another ignorant piece of shit
wearing a general’s uniform.
[There is no requirement
whatever in the regs that require the individual to “reflect any
officially recognized faith group.”
[The general has just broken
military law. Put his scrawny withered
ass on trial.]
In September, the screening board agreed with
Odell.
J.E. McNeil, executive director of the nonprofit
Center for Conscience and War in Washington, said Rogowskyj's request is not as
unusual as the military would make it seem because such requests are not
tallied until completion.
Bye Bye
Clusterfuck:
Italian Troops All Going Home
Now:
No More Iraq War Forever

Italian Defense Minister Arturo Parisi,
center, receives the Italian flag after its lowering at a military base in
Nasiriyah, Dec. 1, 2006, during a ceremony marking the end of the Italian
military mission there. (AP Photo/Nabil Al Jurani)

An Italian Carabinieri officer waves from a
bus December 1, 2006. Italy pulled its
last remaining troops out of Iraq on Friday where 32 of its soldiers died since
the contingent arrived in June 2003.
REUTERS/Atef Hassan (IRAQ)
War Profiteers At Work:
$s Charged DoD Up 900%
11.29.06 Hartford Courant
United Technologies' Hamilton Sundstrand unit
overcharged the Defense Department for aircraft spare parts, according to a
government watchdog group. The costs of
some items under a nine-year, $860 million no-bid contract issued in 2004 have
jumped as much as 900 percent, said the Washington-based Project on Government
Oversight.
IRAQ RESISTANCE ROUNDUP
“Sadr
Still Insists His Main Fight Is With Foreign Invaders”
“We
Iraqis, Sunnis And Shia, Will Always Be Brothers”
He's the
one Shia leader who has opposed the U.S. occupation from the beginning, and who
has continued to call for a strict timetable for American withdrawal. An overwhelming majority of Iraqis now agree
with him.
A
September poll by WorldPublicOpinion.org found that 63 percent of 501 Iraqi
Shiites surveyed supported attacks against Americans.
[Thanks to
Pham Binh, Traveling Soldier, who sent this in.]
Dec. 4, 2006
By Jeffrey Bartholet, Newsweek [Excerpts]
American
soldiers who patrol Sadr's turf in Baghdad understand. They can spot his men.
"They
look like they're pulling security," says First Lt. Robert Hartley, a
25-year-old who plays cat and mouse with the Mahdi Army in the Iraqi
capital.
The Sadrists
use children and young men as lookouts. When GIs get out of their Humvees to
patrol on foot, one of the watchers will fly a kite, or release a flock of
pigeons. Some of Sadr's people have even
infiltrated top ranks of the Iraqi police. Capt. Tom Kapla, 29, says he knows
who they are: "They look at you, and you can tell they want to kill you."
Sadr is a unique force in Iraq:
a leader from the majority Shiites who has resisted American occupation from
the start. He's a populist, a
nationalist…
Large numbers
of impoverished Shiites view Sadr as their guardian: the one leader who is
willing not just to stand up for them but to strike back on their behalf.
His concerns
are high-minded: he speaks of fuel shortages and cabinet politics.
In the past, Sadr was shrugged
off as a rabble-rouser and a nuisance.
Now he is undeniably one of the most popular leaders in the country.
But the longer
the American occupation lasts, the less popular America gets, and the more
popular Sadr [becomes.].
Among ordinary Iraqis, the
United States bears much of the blame for the bloodshed, just for being
there. As Sadr put it to NEWSWEEK
earlier this year, "The occupation is the decision maker ... any attack is
the occupier’s responsibility."
Saddam kept a
close eye on Sadr because the young man inherited a wide network of mosques,
schools and social centers built up by his father.
The network was focused on the
impoverished masses of Iraqi Shiites; the sort of people other religious and
secular leaders didn't have much time for.
Even some
educated Shiites dismissed Moqtada as a zatut, or ignorant child. Some called him "Mullah Atari,"
because he apparently enjoyed videogames as a kid.
Sadr still insists his main
fight is with foreign invaders.
He's the one Shia leader who
has opposed the U.S. occupation from the beginning, and who has continued to
call for a strict timetable for American withdrawal.
An overwhelming majority of
Iraqis now agree with him.
A September poll by
WorldPublicOpinion.org found that 63 percent of 501 Iraqi Shiites surveyed
supported attacks against Americans.
Even in Baghdad, where ethnic
tensions are worst, Shiites agree with Sunnis on one thing: the poll found that
80 percent of the capital's Shiites wanted U.S. forces to leave within a year.
Tehran's main Shiite clients in
Iraq are rivals of Sadr, who is often critical of Persian influence.
Sadr worries
that Iran may be trying to infiltrate his movement, and he's almost surely
right. Fatah al-Sheikh, who is close to
Sadr, says the boss sent a private letter to loyal imams around Baghdad in the
past two weeks identifying 10 followers he believed were suspect.
[ Printable version
] | [ Send it to a friend ]
[ Contatto/Contact ] | [ Home Page ] | [Tutte le notizie/All news ]
|