Saturday, November 12, 2011
Romney: War almost "out of sight, out of mind" From CNN
This headline today from the CNN political ticker bothers me a little bit. While I realize that current wars are unpopular with a large portion of America, has America ever really been at war? A photo that circulated around the internet a while back showed a white board with the statment "America is not at war, America is at the mall" was displayed alongside US Marines at an un-named Marine installation. This sentitment is and has been true since 1946.
Not since WWII has America, as a nation, been asked to make sacrifices for the war effort. Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Haiti, Desert Sheild/Storm, Somalia, and even the current conficts in Iraq and Afghanistan have not required the United States to shift its economy to a war-time posture. It is often said that wars stimulate the economy, but only if the economy is supporting the war. WWII saw a halt in the production of civilian automobiles, with Ford and GM producing tanks, jeeps, trucks, and planes. Unemployment virtually vanished as the ablebodied marched off to war and those back in the States took their places in the factories, including women and minorities (for the first time in our history on such a large scale). This boosted our economy, but at a terrible price. I'm not advocating a world war to fix our economy, but I am advocating an admission from our government that coincides with the sentiment on that white-board. America is NOT at war, the US Military is at war while the rest of the nation (aside from military families and friends) conduct business as usual.
Mr. Romney says he wants to increase wartime communication with the American people. Folks, in this day and age there is NO reason that you cannot get information if you desire it. We have an overload of information at our fingertips. The reason that the wars have dropped off the national radar is that America doesn't want to think about it, nor acknowledge that it is still going on beyond "it costs money" or using the war for political gain, one way or another. I applaud Mr. Romney for wanting to put the war back on the front burner, but once the wars are over, and they will be eventually, what does he have after that? Hopefully something to get America growing once again aside from political double talk and a maintenance of the status quo.
This headline today from the CNN political ticker bothers me a little bit. While I realize that current wars are unpopular with a large portion of America, has America ever really been at war? A photo that circulated around the internet a while back showed a white board with the statment "America is not at war, America is at the mall" was displayed alongside US Marines at an un-named Marine installation. This sentitment is and has been true since 1946.
Not since WWII has America, as a nation, been asked to make sacrifices for the war effort. Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Haiti, Desert Sheild/Storm, Somalia, and even the current conficts in Iraq and Afghanistan have not required the United States to shift its economy to a war-time posture. It is often said that wars stimulate the economy, but only if the economy is supporting the war. WWII saw a halt in the production of civilian automobiles, with Ford and GM producing tanks, jeeps, trucks, and planes. Unemployment virtually vanished as the ablebodied marched off to war and those back in the States took their places in the factories, including women and minorities (for the first time in our history on such a large scale). This boosted our economy, but at a terrible price. I'm not advocating a world war to fix our economy, but I am advocating an admission from our government that coincides with the sentiment on that white-board. America is NOT at war, the US Military is at war while the rest of the nation (aside from military families and friends) conduct business as usual.
Mr. Romney says he wants to increase wartime communication with the American people. Folks, in this day and age there is NO reason that you cannot get information if you desire it. We have an overload of information at our fingertips. The reason that the wars have dropped off the national radar is that America doesn't want to think about it, nor acknowledge that it is still going on beyond "it costs money" or using the war for political gain, one way or another. I applaud Mr. Romney for wanting to put the war back on the front burner, but once the wars are over, and they will be eventually, what does he have after that? Hopefully something to get America growing once again aside from political double talk and a maintenance of the status quo.
10 comments:
I think the way that the "Conflict" in Vietnam hurt America's confidence in sending our Sons and Daughters into combat.
The service every Soldier, Sailor and Pilot gave in Vietnam needs to be honored and their heroism celebrated, but what ends did we reach by fighting a war in Viet Nam from the mid 1960's until the Mid 1970's?
Now turn to the 1990's we went into Kuwait and performed a good deed, one nation invaded one of our allies and we helped, it was a great victory and in many way's vindicated the way some of our soldiers were treated on return from Vietnam.
But I do want to ask this did we need to go into Iraq and remove Hussein? or into Afghanistan to cripple Al Qaeda and the Taliban?
I feel we probably needed to we may not see the results now and today but in the future we will, terrorist organizations may be less apt to plan, organize and carry out murderous attacks on the Greatest Country God Ever Made (well second he did make Isreal first, its in the Bible believe me)
I think that in the years to come the freedom Iraqi's now feel will spread throughout the region, look what is happening in Oman, Syria and Iran today, the common people who want nothing but the freedom and freedom to choose their own fates the rest of the world has.
The only thing we and its all of us has to worry about is the voids we now see in Tunisia, Algeria and Egypt who will fill these voids? Will it be the average Joe (or I suppose Waleed)creating a society where thoughts and ideas for the betterment of all flow or an Uber Radical Faction of Islam who wants to see a world Caliphate?
The difference between Vietnam and Desert Shield/Storm was societal. Vietnam came right on the heels of Korea, which came right on the heels of WWII. The 18-20 somethings that were protesting and fighting the war were products of the babyboom. America was quite frankly tired of being at war. Think about it, from 1941-1975, a span of 34 years, we spent half of it, a full 17 years at war (if we don't count the advisors in Vietnam prior to '65). Society was tired of it, and with the uptick in the number of TVs in American homes, the war, for the first time in history, was piped into living rooms nightly, in all of its glory. Americans KNEW war was hell, but now they saw it. If you think about it, the news coverage of Vietnam started the desensitization of America. Since '75, TV and movies have gotten more graphic (just an interesting side-thought). Iraq is history, whether good or bad. Could it have been handled better, you bet your bupkis it could have been. But it is what it is. I don't think Iraq will embrace the freedom that Europe did after WWII or S. Korea did after that little "police action" (note sarcasm in that term). Iraq and Iran are the two largest Shia-Muslim nations in the world, the will become cozy close to the detriment of the region.
As far as the "Arab Spring" yes, voids have been created, with the assistance of the US, and now, we will reap the whirlwind of our actions. I only hope our CinC will take appropriate measures to keep our country safe.
That is a Good point.... Both of my Grandfather's earned their CIB's in WW2, the other came home from Korea with a Bronze Star. Fast forward to the 60's I had 4 Uncles in the Navy (hold the jokes) and some of Dad's Cousin's in the Army. Fast forward to 1990 I had one Cousin in the Navy.
As far as WWI I don't think any family fought in that, my Great-Grandfathers were both a bit too old (near 30)
Prior to that I had ancestors in the Civil War (both sides) and in the Revolutionary War.....
I am a result of all their sacrifices and thank them for paying in blood for our freedom.
A side note on the CIA/Gubment, Grandfather (on mom's side) always said you would be scared stiff if you knew what the government was capable of. He was a 27 year vet (38-65) and i'm guessing OSS/CIA from what info (or lack therefore of) i have gathered.
Ironically, a nation born of war, strengthened through war, and proficient at war, now has a population with the loudest cry for peace. I don't want war more than the next fellow, but if it comes to us, we do what we need to do, get in, get done and come home. Sadly, our politicians run the wars while our military gets hamstrung with trying to fight "nice". Again, skewed reality.
That was a friend of mine who got one vacation in Bosnia and two in Iraq before getting out, complained about the most was the Handling of Rules of Engagement. Rather than KAMF (google it if need be) and finish it and other "rules" imposed on our forces.
I never could figure out why we didn't come in drop thunder, then set up like we did in Berlin and Tokyo in 1945.
And why did we help these people develop a new government when all we have to do is xerox the Constitution and Bill of Rights and say here is a very good start, its worked here for about 200 years. Now go, prosper.
Cliff, I'm laughing so hard I can't respond.
Did you look up KAMF on Urban Dictionary, It shows a bit of Nerdyness on my part, but it fits..... for the record K A M F is Kill All Mother (explitive)'s
and glad I got a laugh, the reply was partially satirical
And before people go well its 2011 not 1945 and Al Sadyr isn't Hirohito or One of the Nazi's who was caught or surrender to the allies. I say this .... It worked then, people haven't really changed over time, jerks are still jerks and saints are still saints.
More Specifically my good friend left Iraq with such a bad taste that in his heart feels G.W. Bush should be tried for War Crimes for sending our troops in and the way the war was handled...... and I feel he honestly Earned that Opinion and has scars to prove it
I disagree with the "Bush War Crimes" sentiment. I served in Iraq, and while I think it could have been handled better, we (the military) were more free to protect ourselves, and engage the enemy than we were when Obama took over. I'm not slamming Obama, but the fact remains that when he took over as CinC, the dynamic changed, drastically. But with Bush, as with all CinCs starting with Truman, they run the war based on public opinion rather than on military necessity. Truman was strong when he dropped the bomb on Japan, earned his stripes so to speak. In Korea, he let MacArthur run the Inchon Landing, but subsequently fired a popular and capable commander. That was the turning point in American military strategy. Fast forward through Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon to Bush Sr. He let "Stormin' Norman" run Desert Shield/Storm. 100 hours after the ground war started, it was done. THAT'S how a war should be run. Violence of action wins battles which in turn wins wars. Bush Jr. put Franks in charge of the invastion in '03. Smart move, but he let his advisors whisper in his ears a little too much, subsequently hamstringing the military. Towards the end of the Bush administration, the Mehdi Army (spelling might be off), the Shia Militia in Sadr City, led by Al Sadr, was taken OFF the designated "enemy" list. Now, we were told to work with the very same people who a week prior were trying to kill us, and in many cases continued to try and kill us. If you want to see confusion on the battlefield, let your "allies" start shooting at you while you are shooting at the enemy. Fast forward to Obama's election. The dynamic changed, as I said. If you asked the Iraqis, they figured we'd be home in a week because America had a "muslim" president. (avoid the comments on this issue) We pulled back into our bases and caught rockets and mortars instead of taking the fight to them. Defense alone will not win a war.
Bush was not a perfect CinC, by any means, but I will leave you with this question. Bush was in power during 9/11. And from then to now, how many attacks have we had? He must have done SOMETHING right if they haven't come back as they promised they would.
I'd imagine a number of threats were thwarted during Bush Jr's term... but we'll never know, because by telling us more would be put in harms way etcetera.
Also I heard they did in fact find WMD's in Iraq but something about how they found them they had to keep it hush (see harm comment in previous sentence)
Like I said that was one vet's opinion, he was there in the first wave where he got to spend 45 days with no clean clothes or shower while piloting a bradley.
But I value his opinion he was there, he earned his Purple Heart, though i think the lack of pride in purple hearts are another topic.
Post a Comment