"Stop, Loss" Point: you can't go home again
the past week brought some of the most disturbing news i've read in a long while. it was announced that the first class-action lawsuit challenging the army "stop, loss" orders was filed in federal court. the "stop, loss" order means that troops who have already fufilled their service obligation are forced to stay in combat, or be re-deployed instead of going home. This seems to be just the latest in a string of seemingly unconstitutional issues that the bush administration is trying to blow past us.
This bush-led policy is not so much as mishap but an unmitigated disaster. Thousands of people who are supposed to be home are not. More and more troops are dying in a war that has all but faded from the media as we shift into holiday mode. Instead of leading off with war related stories, national newspapers like the New York Daily News are leading off with earth shattering tales like that of "Pale Male". Pale Male, who those are you who are blissfully unaware, is a red-tailed hawk who has been relocated from his rooftop on Fifth Avenue because he's defecating on passerbyes.
Hey, I love a good hawk-interest story as much as the next heterosexual male, but this is the FRONT PAGE! I went on to look for any war-related story, and didn't find one until page 9. For those of you with a scorecard, that's after: Supreme Court allows hallucinogenic tea (page 2), Gisele stiffs her dog's rescuers on the reward (page 4), and my favorite: councilman demanding an apology for a collegue using the term "drunken sailor" (page 3).
This blatant disregard for the war is at best dishearting, and i'm coming from the perspective of not having any family or close friends in combat. I can only imagine how it must be for the children, spouses, and parents waiting for their loved ones to come home, something they were supposed to already have done. Generally when the U.S. Armed Forces tells you something, you tend to believe it. At least, that was B.R. (before rumsfeld)
Here's the confession in today's post: I didn't vote for george w. bush. Anyone who finished the 9th grade figured that out already. I don't understand where we, as a country, got the right to police the rest of the world, corrupt as it may be. I do believe that the U.S., as world superpower, should feel the duty to help less-developed countries. By help, I mean economic and social aid and cooperating with the United Nations. I do not mean blowing into Iraq like the outlaw josey wales, poised six shooter in each hand, with evidence as flimsy as a lindsay lohan tube top. What kills me is that the voters that went to the polls for g.w. are the demographic fighting this underfunded, underappreciated war.
Your stance on the war here is irrelevant. Rules should be rules, and those brave enough to protect freedom should not be toyed with. Bring the overdue troops home, and do it now.
bring the rest home too.
paul.
This bush-led policy is not so much as mishap but an unmitigated disaster. Thousands of people who are supposed to be home are not. More and more troops are dying in a war that has all but faded from the media as we shift into holiday mode. Instead of leading off with war related stories, national newspapers like the New York Daily News are leading off with earth shattering tales like that of "Pale Male". Pale Male, who those are you who are blissfully unaware, is a red-tailed hawk who has been relocated from his rooftop on Fifth Avenue because he's defecating on passerbyes.
Hey, I love a good hawk-interest story as much as the next heterosexual male, but this is the FRONT PAGE! I went on to look for any war-related story, and didn't find one until page 9. For those of you with a scorecard, that's after: Supreme Court allows hallucinogenic tea (page 2), Gisele stiffs her dog's rescuers on the reward (page 4), and my favorite: councilman demanding an apology for a collegue using the term "drunken sailor" (page 3).
This blatant disregard for the war is at best dishearting, and i'm coming from the perspective of not having any family or close friends in combat. I can only imagine how it must be for the children, spouses, and parents waiting for their loved ones to come home, something they were supposed to already have done. Generally when the U.S. Armed Forces tells you something, you tend to believe it. At least, that was B.R. (before rumsfeld)
Here's the confession in today's post: I didn't vote for george w. bush. Anyone who finished the 9th grade figured that out already. I don't understand where we, as a country, got the right to police the rest of the world, corrupt as it may be. I do believe that the U.S., as world superpower, should feel the duty to help less-developed countries. By help, I mean economic and social aid and cooperating with the United Nations. I do not mean blowing into Iraq like the outlaw josey wales, poised six shooter in each hand, with evidence as flimsy as a lindsay lohan tube top. What kills me is that the voters that went to the polls for g.w. are the demographic fighting this underfunded, underappreciated war.
Your stance on the war here is irrelevant. Rules should be rules, and those brave enough to protect freedom should not be toyed with. Bring the overdue troops home, and do it now.
bring the rest home too.
paul.
posted by paul at 7:35 AM
2 Comments:
Dear Judge,
It's more than disturbing that you would liken the war in Iraq to a football game. The analogy is actually pathetic. My only child is now in Baghdad. His best friend has just returned from his second tour in Afghanistan. I promise you there is no similarity between the random RPGs & IEDs and piling on!
In my previous life, I was a military caseworker for a U.S. Senator and witnessed first hand the trickery used by military recruiters to reach their monthly quota for abled-bodied men. Have you EVER read a military recruitment contract?????
In short, you do not know what you're talking about. In the future, please do not insult our brave young soldiers and Marines by suggesting that what they are experiencing is some type of sporting event.
We are shooting ourselves in the foot with the "stop, loss" orders. The US army has become one of the most effecient and effective military forces based around one idea. A voulenteer military. Our own research has proven this to be one of our core competitive advantages. It is not only wrong to issue these "stop, loss" orders but it stupid and not in the military's best interest. It is a short term solution that will have long term ramifications one of which will be an enormous loss of credibility when recruiting in the future
Post a Comment
<< Home