9/11

9/11, Iraq, John Murtha

Murtha and America should watch his Vietnam withdrawal from Iraq

by  • 

What does redeployment mean exactly?” asked one reporter [July 25, 2007]. “Get the hell out [of Iraq],” Mr. Murtha replied. — Jerome L. Sherman, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

The Democratic Party’s leadership wants no “change of direction” in Iraq; they want complete withdrawal. They are willing to stand by, to ignore the carnage that will come, just as they ignored the killing fields of Vietnam and Cambodia:

Another asked if any troops would stay behind to engage in counterterrorism operations. “None, zero,” [Murtha] said. He warned that an evacuation of the U.S. embassy in Baghdad could happen, repeating the images of Americans boarding a helicopter in Saigon during the final days of the Vietnam War in 1975. He dismissed calls to leave a smaller force of U.S. troops in Iraq, warning that those troops would be more vulnerable to enemy attacks because of the modern military’s considerable logistical needs.

This anti-“Bush’s war” effort was never about redeploying a significant sized forced to the “real war” in Afghanistan or to anywhere nearby to conduct anti-terror operations. It was always about a return to September 10:

“The Army is broken,” [Murtha] said. “The Army is hurting. We couldn’t deploy anyplace.”

Should he succeed, John Murtha should be redeployed to watch and listen, forced to stand atop the berm holding a white flag as our troops pass by in full retreat. He has earned their disdain.

Murtha’s eyes should be wide open. There should be no cotton in his ears. If fact, everyone in Congress who votes for withdrawal and every Presidential candidate who advocates the same should be required to stand there with him. All the anti-war mainstream media should be there; their editors and reporters dragged from their air-conditioned havens and made to watch. Let us not forget the self-proclaimed humanitarians, the anti-war whacko left. I will not name them; the list is long and their names sicken me. They should all be there.

Fly UAVs all over the killing fields. Position cameras and plant sound transmitters on each corner. Every American television station should be locked on the carnage, 24/7, uncensored, sound on, and with no commercial interruptions.

Iraq is why 9/11 is gone from the anti-war media. We watched that day in horror, when war came to our shores. We saw what happens when you do nothing to prevent a slaughter. We vowed to never forget. Yet most of America has forgotten and just shut its eyes.

If we withdraw from Iraq, it will be 9/11 there a thousand-fold, and we all should be forced to watch. When it’s over, when the screaming ends, every American should hang their head in shame.

9/11, War on Terror

The 9/11 Generation

by  • 

“In the 1960s, history called the Baby Boomers. They didn’t answer the phone.” — Dean Barnett

There is a excellent piece in The Weekly Standard that struck home with me. I went from 7 to 16 during the 1960s and thank God everyday that I wasn’t born a day earlier or more afflicted mentally (with the lone exception of Dr. King’s inspiring life) by that decade’s “progressive” thinking. Mr. Barnett is correct; this generation is Better than the Boomers:

One of the excesses of the 1960s that present-day liberals have disowned and disavowed since 9/11 is the demonization of the American military. While every now and then an unrepentant liberal like Charlie Rangel will appear on cable news and casually accuse U.S. troops of engaging in baby-killing in Iraq, the liberal establishment generally knows better. They “support” the American military — at least in the abstract, until it does anything resembling fighting a war.

In search of a new narrative, 21st-century liberals have settled on the “soldiers are victims” meme. Democratic senators (and the occasional Republican senator who’s facing a tough reelection campaign) routinely pronounce their concern for our “children” in Iraq. One of the reasons John Kerry’s “botched joke” resonated so strongly was that it fit the liberals’ narrative. The Democratic party would have you believe that our soldiers are children or, at best, adults with few options: In short, a callous and mendacious administration has victimized the young, the gullible, and the hopeless, and stuck them in Iraq.

But this narrative is not just insulting to our fighting men and women, it is also grossly inaccurate.

Kurt Schlichter is a lieutenant colonel in the California National Guard. A veteran of the first Gulf war, he’s now stateside and commands the 1-18th Cavalry, 462-man RSTA (Reconnaissance, Surveillance, and Target Acquisition) squadron attached to the 40th Infantry Brigade Combat Team. The last media representative he spoke with before I contacted him was a New York Times stringer who wanted Schlichter’s help in tracking down guardsmen who were “having trouble because they got mobilized.”

Take a few minutes and READ THE REST