Blog sprinkles

Thank you for your service to our nation.

CAMP VICTORY, Iraq — With heads bowed beneath a palace dome still etched with the initials of Saddam Hussein, dozens of U.S. service members paid tribute Monday to Americans killed in action not only in Iraq, but also in Afghanistan and in wars of the past.

Officers presented a Memorial Day wreath, a bugler played "Taps" and a lieutenant general spoke about how "little compares to the loss of a brother in arms." Soldiers in uniform and contractors in work boots said the nearly 4,400 Americans who've died in Iraq since 2003 weren't faceless statistics: They were commanders, friends, family.

For some of the troops who gathered at Camp Victory in Baghdad, it was difficult to discuss individual losses, even now that combat deaths have tapered off and the war here is eclipsed by the bloodshed in Afghanistan, where the number of troops killed in action just passed the 1,000 mark.

"It's too personal," said Air Force Staff Sgt. Bien Covita, 34, of San Jose, Calif., looking away as he declined to discuss the fallen service member on his mind. He added that he wished that Americans would view Memorial Day as "more than just a day off work. We sacrifice every day for them to sleep comfortably."

Seeing the war dead arrive at Dover:

It was pretty stark in the dim light with an almost full moon; at first there was no one there. Then the bus carrying the families showed up but it was choreographed so they got out on the side away from us so we could not see them. One white van, what they call the "transfer vehicle," was parked on the tarmac and one soldier, a young woman, stood next to it. She is the "Transfer Vehicle Guide," whose ceremonial role it is to close the van's back doors after the bodies are loaded on board.

The procedure began with high-ranking officers and the pall-bearer details appearing, marching in formation. Since there were two dead that night, Cpl. Kenneth Nichols, Jr., of Chrisman, Illinois, US Army, and Lance Cpl. Jonathan Taylor, of Jacksonville, Florida, US Marine Corps, both killed in Afghanistan, there were two separate teams, one from the Army, the other of Marines, dressed in their different uniforms.

The Army went first, boarded the stairs onto the airplane, and emerged out the front. The loading ramp then lowered onto ground level with the coffin and the seven pall-bearers carried the body past the saluting officers, into the waiting van. The Marines then repeated the same. Not a sound could be heard from the hidden family members just a few feet from us on the other side of their bus. Another time, I could hear a woman, probably the wife or the mother, crying a terrible wail that was the only sound on the airfield.

Asking too much of our military and their families:

Brooke Knox, a former Navy wife, counsels military relatives who are struggling with the repeated deployments of husbands and fathers, wives and mothers.
There's often one unifying refrain -- one deployment too many to handle well. She has found that often, that number is three.
"There's a saying among Army wives," said Knox, who leads a free counseling program for military families through the Mental Health Association of Tarrant County.
"The first deployment, they say, 'I think I can do this.'
"The second deployment, they say, 'I know I can do this.'
"The third deployment, they say, 'I can't do this.'"

And the week that was:



28 Of The Worst Money-Saving Ideas Ever The comments are entertaining...

Tylenol being recalled:

The company recalled 40 widely used children's pain and allergy medications, saying some may have a higher concentration of their active ingredients, while others may be contaminated. J&J has had four recalls in the past year of over-the-counter medicines.

In an FDA report issued on Tuesday, inspectors said they found thick dust, grime and contaminated ingredients at the J&J plant that produces Children's Tylenol and dozens of other products recalled last week.

DeLauro, in her letter, said the company's "disregard" for manufacturing standards was "both unnerving and unethical."

"The corporate oversight observed at this facility appears to be symptomatic of reckless behavior that is clearly unacceptable," she wrote.

What the hell was Israel thinking?:

After least nine people have been killed after Israeli commandos stormed a convoy of ships carrying aid to the Gaza Strip, the Israeli army says.

Armed forces boarded the largest vessel overnight, clashing with some of the 500 people on board.

It happened about 40 miles (64 km) out to sea, in international waters.

Israel says its soldiers were shot at and attacked with weapons; the activists say Israeli troops came on board shooting.

The activists were attempting to defy a blockade imposed by Israel after the Islamist movement Hamas took power in Gaza in 2007.

THIS is what I've been saying. All that oil just doesn't disappear.

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — Streaming video of oil pouring from the seafloor and images of dead, crude-soaked birds serve as visual bookends to the natural calamity unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico.

But independent scientists and government officials say another disaster is playing out in slow motion — and out of public view — in the mysterious depths between the gusher and the coast, a world inhabited by sperm whales, gigantic jellyfish and diminutive plankton.

All about fucking booms... and how BP isn't doing anything right:

It's fucking obvious. Boom is not meant to contain or catch oil. Boom is meant to divert oil. Boom must always be at an angle to the prevailing wind-wave action or surface current. Boom, at this angle, must always be layered in a fucking overlapped sort-of way with another string of boom. Boom must always divert oil to a catch basin or other container, from where it can be REMOVED FROM THE FUCKING AREA. Looks kinda involved, doesn't it? It is. But if fucking proper fucking booming is done properly, you can remove most, by far most of the oil from a shoreline and you can do it day after day, week after week, month after month. You can prevent most, by far most of the shoreline from ever being touched by more than a few transient molecules of oil. Done fucking properly, a week after the oil stops coming ashore, no one, man nor beast, can ever tell there has been oil anywhere near that shoreline.

And the inevitable:

While work continues to try to staunch the flow of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, an avalanche of class action lawsuits is descending upon BP in courthouses from Texas to Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi and Florida.

Pakistan, between a rock and a hard place....

This week's visit by the US president's national-security adviser and the head of the Central Intelligence Agency to Pakistan was portrayed as a feel-good trip that highlighted the high level of cooperation between Washington and Islamabad.

But despite what may have been written about CIA chief Leon Panetta's and General James Jones's meetings with civilian and military leadership during their visit, analysts in Pakistan say all is not well between the two sides.

They note that as senior US officials visit Islamabad to make new demands -- mostly about increasing military or law enforcement efforts against myriad extremist groups in Pakistan's western border regions -- Pakistani officials continue to respond by urging patience, asking for more money and weapons, and calling for a true understanding of their military, political, and economic limitations.

Former Pakistani diplomat Tayyab Siddiqui says the US-Pakistani relationship is currently on a "bumpy road" and the visit by the two senior US officials a week ahead of a planned second round of strategic dialogue was significant.

Uhhhh.... right.

The Vatican is planning a new initiative to reach out to atheists and agnostics in an attempt to improve the church's relationship with non-believers. Pope Benedict XVI has ordered officials to create a new foundation where atheists will be encouraged to meet and debate with some of the Catholic Church's top theologians.

The Vatican hopes to stage a series of debates in Paris next year. But militant non-believers hoping for a chance to set senior church figures straight about the existence of God are set to be disappointed: the church has warned that atheists with high public profiles such as Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens will not be invited.

No Dawkins and Hitchens? Then you aren't serious. And then there's this:

Tombstone, shackles found in priest's home
Poole, accused of shoplifting, nailed posters all over rectory

So how about you fix your own house before you go knocking on other people's doors, Pope?

Because we are so desperate for soldiers?

Army Sends Mom to Afghanistan, Infant to Protective Services

Military is trying to figure out why there is a surge in suicides

In 2008, 140 soldiers on active duty took their own lives, continuing a trend in which the number of suicides has increased more than 60 percent since 2003, surpassing the rate for the general U.S. population.

To deal with the problem, the Army has added to the ranks of mental health and substance abuse counselors. The service also required all units to cease operations for two to four hours to talk about suicide prevention in February and March.

Chiarelli's monthly meetings are the Army's way of sleuthing out patterns and identifying new policies to deal with the trend.

The answer to this puzzling problem is found within the same article. To help, I've bolded it.:

The Army's biggest challenge is that its volunteer force is in uncharted territory. Many soldiers are now in the midst of their third or fourth combat tour, and Army surveys show that mental health deteriorates with each one. Senior Army officials said they are focusing more resources, including extra mental health counselors, where troops are returning from multiple deployments. This year, Fort Campbell, Ky., which is home to the frequently deployed 101st Airborne Division, has had 14 suicides.

"We probably don't know how many mental health care providers we need after eight years of war and three and four deployments," Chiarelli said.

Um... guys. The military is broken. Soldiers are people and they are used up and tired. You can't have an Eternal War on a Noun and expect only a small percentage of the American population to fight it ... forever. You can't extend tours, use stop-loss, badger and harass soldiers into reenlisting, lie to get potential recruits to sign up, ignore signs of mental stress and ptsd, provide crappy veteran's care and not have a backlash.

How about this? Stop the wars. Bring the soldiers home. Focus the attentions of the mental health care providers on our troops at home who will need assistance in fitting back into society. It just might work!

Update: Remembered this post a little more than a year ago about the estimate of attempted suicides.... 12,000.

Strange, filibustering is not so bad when the Republicans do it

Wasn't it just called the nuclear option?

Thers of Whiskey Fire reminds us:

Another bill on Iraq dies in the Senate: this time Webb's bill on limiting the duration of deployments for service members in Iraq. The reason the bill failed, as have all the other Iraq bills, despite the fact that the Democrats control the Senate and the country overwhelmingly wants them to pass, is that they were filibustered.

There was a time in this country when the concept of the filibuster was roundly decried as anti-democratic. It was a dim and misty and faraway time. 2004.

[snip]

Yes, it's legislation and not appointments that are now being filibustered, but that's a minor distinction in the face of rhetoric like "the tyranny of the minority." That's especially the case when the Senate political minority is an American political minority: "7 in 10 Americans say they favor a policy to remove most U.S. troops from Iraq by April of next year.... The July 6-8, 2007, poll finds 62% of Americans saying the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq; 36% say it was not a mistake. This is the first time Gallup has shown opposition to the war exceeding the 60% level."*

What's amusing is not so much the GOP hypocrisy, which long ago lost its capacity to shock or surprise. It's the rather odd fact that the filibustering is getting scanty media attention (as Kevin Drum observes) -- particularly in contrast to the siren-blaring obsession with the "nuclear option" (teh scary!) back in the day.

Who wins in this game of chicken?

And who loses? Besides the troops, I mean.

Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo:

President Bush gives every indication that he intends to keep troop deployments at their current level through January 2009. Sure, if everyone chills out in Iraq and finally throws him the parade the president is holding out for, he'll begin bringing the troops home. But on planet Earth it's stay through course through 1/09.

The president's ability to pull that off -- both in terms of raw votes and public sentiment -- rests almost entirely on a solid phalanx of support among congressional Republicans and 2008 Republican presidential aspirants. They don't have to be for the president's war or his conduct of it. But they need to stay resolutely opposed to Democratic efforts to end it.

As long as that's the case, as long as the vast majority of Republicans oppose Democratic attempts to end the war, that will keep Democrats (not saying it's right, just observing the dynamics) from really going to the mat over it. And as long as Democrats don't force a major confrontation that keeps it all sort of murky in the public mind who's for or against. But eventually -- maybe as soon as September -- public opposition will become so overwhelming that the Democrats may be willing to really force the matter and not worry about lacking any bipartisan cover. Or maybe by September enough Republicans will see the numbers and give in and give the Democrats their veto-proof majorities.

[snip]

The truth is that the president is playing a very high-stakes game of chicken with his fellow Republicans. He's driving a hundred miles an hour toward the cliff, way too fast to jump out of the car without risking serious injury. But as the cliff gets closer, they'll start to jump.

Supporting our troops

One brain lesion at a time. I guess the Bush administration's thinking goes: if you're wounded, you should just stay in Iraq and be used up. Why come home and cost money for the Pentagon?

Think Progress:

Salon.com’s Mark Benjamin revealed last month that seriously injured U.S. soldiers are being dispatched back to Iraq:

As the military scrambles to pour more soldiers into Iraq, a unit of the Army’s 3rd Infantry Division at Fort Benning, Ga., is deploying troops with serious injuries and other medical problems, including GIs who doctors have said are medically unfit for battle. Some are too injured to wear their body armor, according to medical records.

Days later, House Armed Services Chairman Ike Skelton (D-MO) and Military Personnel Subcommittee Chairman Vic Snyder (D-AR) requested an immediate review of Benjamin’s report in a letter to the Government Accountability Office (GAO).

[snip] One of those soldiers received this caring treatment of his brain lesions:

An MRI later showed that Thurman had lesions on the right parietal lobe of his brain, a condition that led to a “don’t deploy” order — which the Army violated, according to Thurman. Worse, rather than providing compassionate understanding of the symptoms associated with traumatic brain injury, he said leaders at Fort Carson, Colo., have harassed him, refused him medication and pushed for an Article 15.

Which makes me want to rerun this post:

Snagged Bryan's entire post at Why Now?

1-800-984-8523

Lurch at Main and Central reports on the The Wounded Warrior System:

The Wounded Soldier and Family Hotline can be reached from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. [EDT] Monday through Friday at (800) 984-8523. The call center is under the command of the U.S. Army’s Human Resources Command. As the system gears up, it is expected that it will go 24/7.

This is a reaction to the problems with the military medical system. It is a start, and should be used so they can at least understand the scope of the disaster.

Update: McClatchy Washington Bureau has a report on 'Disposable Soldiers'.

As Iraqis stand up, we can stand down.

Well ok, when Iraqis squat and take cover, we can step back and yell directions. Not yet? When Iraqis peek out of their bunkers, then we can drive our tanks in the other direction a few yards.....

“Military planners have abandoned the idea that standing up Iraqi troops will enable American soldiers to start coming home soon and now believe that U.S. troops will have to defeat the insurgents and secure control of troubled provinces. Training Iraqi troops, which had been the cornerstone of the Bush administration’s Iraq policy since 2005, has dropped in priority, officials in Baghdad and Washington said. … Pentagon officials said they know of no new training resources that have been included in U.S. plans to dispatch 28,000 additional troops to Iraq.”

Wait! I've got it. When Iraqis stand up, we will have been standing and taking the bullets for decades.....

Bush is indifferent to the soldiers' needs

Because they volunteered to do this, you know. Use 'em up and throw 'em out. (Via skippy the bush kangaroo)

Wounded being sent back to Iraq:

As the military scrambles to pour more soldiers into Iraq, a unit of the Army's 3rd Infantry Division at Fort Benning, Ga., is deploying troops with serious injuries and other medical problems, including GIs who doctors have said are medically unfit for battle. Some are too injured to wear their body armor, according to medical records.

Syria deploying missiles near the Golan Heights?

Or not?

Jerusalem, Israel (AHN) - Israeli military officials gave conflicting reports at the weekend regarding possible hostile Syrian military deployments near the Golan Heights.

Speaking on condition of anonymity to the Agence France-Presse, three Israel Defense Forces (IDF) officers and two Israeli government officials said that "hundreds, possibly thousands" of medium- and long-range missiles had been moved by Syria in recent weeks to put them in range of major Israeli population centers.

And here:

Quoting three Israeli military and two government sources, the French news agency AFP reports the Syrian army has accelerated its deployment of medium and long-range rockets capable of striking major towns across northern Israel.

And here:

Night Watch: DAMASCUS - Debka intelligence sources in Washington and Jerusalem report that Syria - Iran are taking steps to cause the next round of fighting against Israel intended to spread beyond southern Lebanon into the Golan Heights, the area seized by Israel from Syria in June 1967. For the third time in two days Syria President Bashar al-Assad has criticized the positioning of UNFIL forces along the Syrian-Lebanese border to prevent the rearming of Hezbollah. Assad has declared such proposals a hostile act directed at Damascus and has threatened to close the border to foreign forces, preventing their deployment and the UN peace mission. [DEBKA]

Debka also reported that on Wednesday an Iranian official announced the emergence, in Syria, of a new Islamic militant unit, designed to attack the Israel Defence Force (IDF) in Golan, in the same way Hezbollah did in south Lebanon. No timetable was given for the attacks but already Israel has engaged in some artilllery shelling into the Shebaa farms area where Israel, Lebanon and Syria meet. Intelligence reports indicate that, according to the next round scenario, Syria is to engage in border skirmishes with the IDF which is probably why, just before the ceasefire, the news mentioned Syrian tanks already positioned on the Golan border, while Hezbollah is to resume attacks against IDF positions in southern Lebanon.

Here is a list of the things that Syria is doing:

Just two weeks before a crucial meeting between Syria and the US in Baghdad, Iraq's Ambassador to the UN says Syria is doing everything it can to protect the border with Iraq.

It has been a frequent American accusation that Syria isn't doing enough.

But Hamid Al Bayati praised Syria for stopping attackers crossing the border. He says other countries now need to do their bit to help: "[Syria] expected at the beginning for the Americans to give such [surveillance equipment including night vision cameras]. They said that the Americans didn't give them such equipment, so they can't guard the borders," he said.

America accuses Syria, while Iraq praises Syria but says America needs to pull its weight. Sound familiar?

Refugees in Syria - UN praises Syria for taking one million Iraqi refugees...but asks America to pull its weight.

Hariri inquiry - UN praises Syria's "full co-operation"...but says 10 countries have blocked the inquiry (thought to include America).

Peace with Israel - Israel says it wants to talk to Syria, Syria says it wants to talk to Israel...but America blocks peace talks.

And the talks in Baghdad between Syria and the US? Nothing.

The talks between Iran and the US? Apparently each blamed the other for the Iraq war:

March 11 (Bloomberg) -- Delegates from Iran and the U.S. blamed each other for the conflict in Iraq at a conference in Baghdad aimed at forging international cooperation on steps to end the killings and attacks in the country.

The one-day meeting, which included representatives of 14 governments and three multinational organizations, provided an unusual opportunity for the U.S. to discuss Iraqi violence directly with two Middle East adversaries: Syria and Iran.

Pandagon gets an email from a soldier

Which mentions a word I've been using to describe the stop-loss program: Slavery.

I am a soldier serving at Fort Hood. I signed up in 2003 for a 5 year contract (I should ETS on 1/15/08). I joined at 32 years old to serve my country. I have been to Iraq twice already and was looking forward to start terminal leave in Dec of 2007.

Now after my unit returned we were told our company was being moved and that all the soldiers had to go to another company. This new company has not deployed in over a year so on paper it looks like we have been home longer.

I asked not to be sent here since I knew I would be stop lossed. Basically the answer was no and too bad.

You see they no longer care about soldiers serving honorably and doing right by us. What they are doing is finding a loophole to extend soldiers in their contracts for a year or more. This in turn makes it look like the army is not short of soldiers.

Let me give you the truth. The army is scrambling to find soldiers ad morale is getting worse. Not as much due to the deployments (that’s part of it) but also to the knowledge that when our time comes the army can keep us as long as they want.

When I joined the stop loss was not explained to me. Had it been I would never have signed. What they are doing is a form of slavery that we the soldiers can do nothing about. If they needed to stay so badly they could ask me to extend and as a patriot I probably would have but to be forced to with threat of jail and the loss of my freedom then I have no choice.

Finally, I should note that I have never had any discipline problems and even volunteered for my second deployment becuase the company I went with needed soldiers. While in Iraq I served honorably and have seen combat on several occasions. I even volunteered to go in January so I would not be stop lossed but was denied.

The command cares little for the soldiers here and has a policy in place that is wrong in a supposedly volunteer army.

Update: Reminds me to bring up this journal which was written by a soldier while in Afghanistan and then at home.

Murtha's plan:

Give the money for troops but limit the extentions:

...Democratic leaders have rallied around a strategy that would fully fund the president's $100 billion request for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but would limit his ability to use the money.

Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee on defense, will formally outline the Democrats' plan today to antiwar groups agitating for binding action against the war. Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.), a subcommittee member who helped arrange the Internet event, said the plan is aimed at tamping down calls from the Democrats' liberal wing for Congress to simply end funding for the war.

The Murtha plan, based on existing military guidelines, includes a stipulation that Army troops who have already served in Iraq must be granted two years at home before an additional deployment, Marines must be given 14 months at home, and any troops sent to Iraq must be those deemed fully trained and equipped under existing military standards. The idea is to slowly choke off the war by stopping the deployment of troops from units that have been badly degraded by four years of combat.

"They won't be able to deploy troops unless they extend troops overseas. And if we limit the extension, then it'll be very difficult for them to continue this surge, which the American people are against and the Iraqis don't want," Murtha said yesterday on National Public Radio.