Target Centermass

Author: Gunner

  • U.S. GIs Hit Rumsfeld With Hard Questions

    In a time of war, this disgusts me on many levels.

    In a rare public airing of grievances, disgruntled soldiers complained to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on Wednesday about long deployments and a lack of armored vehicles and other equipment.

    “You go to war with the Army you have,” Rumsfeld replied, “not the Army you might want or wish to have.”

    Spc. Thomas Wilson had asked the defense secretary, “Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles?” Shouts of approval and applause arose from the estimated 2,300 soldiers who had assembled to see Rumsfeld.

    Rumsfeld hesitated and asked Wilson to repeat his question.

    “We do not have proper armored vehicles to carry with us north,” Wilson, 31, of Nashville, Tenn., concluded after asking again.

    Wilson, an airplane mechanic whose unit, the 278th Regimental Combat Team of the Tennessee Army National Guard, is about to drive north into Iraq for a one-year tour of duty, put his finger on a problem that has bedeviled the Pentagon for more than a year. Rarely, though, is it put so bluntly in a public forum.

    First, media coverage of such an event should be better controlled, if not completely banned. I have no problem with top brass getting feedback from the lower echelons, but this should be an opportunity to exchange information, concerns and reassurances, not a chance to create political footballs. That was the fault of those in charge.

    The soldier’s question was out of line in a public forum. Grumbling and complaining are more than a soldier’s right — they’re practically an obligation. However, said grumbling and complaining is not to be done in a manner to cast an ill effect upon morale. Especially in a war zone. Rumsfeld’s response was correct — ya fight with what ya got. We fought in World War II with tanks tragically inferior to those of the Germans. Such shortcomings are made up for in other areas until they can be feasibly addressed. This improper questioning, this verbal poison, was the fault of the soldier. Why did it have to be a freakin’ Guardsman?!

    As to the “shouts of approval and applause,” I saw video of this and, while some shouting and clapping occurred, it was a very small percentage of those present. That this was presented in the manner above was an attempt to politicize and enhance the negativity of the story. That is the fault of the media.

    What is the actual armor situation?

    Rumsfeld said the Army was sparing no expense or effort to acquire as many Humvees and other vehicles with extra armor as it can. What is more, he said, armor is not the savior some think it is.

    “You can have all the armor in the world on a tank and a tank can (still) be blown up,” he said. The same applies to the much smaller Humvee utility vehicles that, without extra armor, are highly vulnerable to the insurgents’ weapon of choice in Iraq, the improvised explosive device that is a roadside threat to Army convoys and patrols.

    U.S. soldiers and Marines in Iraq are killed or maimed by roadside bombs almost daily. Adding armor protection to Humvees and other vehicles that normally are not used in direct combat has been a priority for the Army, but manufacturers have not been able to keep up with the demand.

    …

    At the Pentagon, spokesman Larry Di Rita said production of armored Humvees had increased from 15 to 450 a month since fall 2003, when commanders in Iraq started asking for them because of insurgents’ heavy use of roadside explosives.

    Overall, there are 19,000 armored Humvees in the Iraqi theater. Some were built with additional armor, others had it added on later. That’s, 2,000 short of what commanders are asking for, Di Rita acknowledged.

    Military policy is that troops driving into Iraq in Humvees drive only in armored ones, Di Rita said. Some $1.2 billion has been included in the defense budget to pay for armored vehicles, he said.

    Any other complaints, troops, while you have the SecDef and the cameras here?

    Wilson and others, however, had criticisms of their own — not of the war but of how it was being fought.

    During the question-and-answer session, another soldier complained that active-duty Army units seem to get priority over National Guard and Reserve units for the best equipment used in Iraq.

    “There’s no way I can prove it, but I am told the Army is breaking its neck to see that there is not” discrimination of that kind, Rumsfeld said.

    Shut up, do your job and quit embarrassing the Guard and Reserves. Regarding this and other such embarrassments, Stryker has created an entire Reservist category on his Digital Warfare site. As a former Guardsman, I don’t blame him one freaking iota.

  • AWOL Soldier Seeks Canadian Help

    An American is making headlines for deserting and begging our neighbor to the north for refuge.

    An American soldier who fought in Afghanistan two years ago but deserted and fled from the United States before he could be sent to Iraq has launched a long-shot bid for political refuge in Canada.

    Jeremy Hinzman, 26, has appeared before Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Board, claiming he would face persecution if sent home to the US.

    Mr. Hinzman testified that while his comrades regarded him as a “soldier’s soldier”, he realised over time that he could not kill another human being.

    I wonder if the brave troops Hinzman left behind still consider him a “soldier’s soldier.” Actually, no, I don’t. I think his former comrades could come up with more colorful terms now.

    The South Dakota-born soldier of the 82nd Airborne Division is claiming refugee status based on his contention that he was right to refuse to fight in the war in Iraq, which he says is illegal and violated human rights.

    Mr Hinzman said he had requested conscientious objector status in the US in 2002.

    But his case failed and he was sent to Afghanistan, where he eventually made 18 combat parachute jumps.

    Late last year he learned he was to be deployed to Iraq, prompting him to flee to Canada early this year with his Laotian wife Nga Nguyen and two-year-old son, Liam.

    His case, and that of two other fugitive American soldiers, has stirred sympathy in Canada, which opposed the Iraq war.

    But it has also raised fears that a positive ruling could spark a flood of US deserters across the border, as the toll of the Iraq war and occupation deepens, having already cost more than 1000 US lives.

    The chances of Mr Hinzman getting refugee status are seen as slim. No such decision has ever been made in Canada.

    ….

    He testified that his growing awareness that killing was wrong was partly born from an interest in Buddhism and attendance at Quaker religious meetings.

    Outside, a knot of anti-war supporters, waved banners reading, “Let him stay.”

    Yes, please let him stay, Canada. We’ll keep the red, white and blue, and y’all can coddle our yellow.

    Should he remain in Canada as a deserter, Hinzman’s citizenship should be revoked if possible. If it can’t be, that’s a shame that I would love to see corrected. Should any such deserters elect to return, I would like to see Hinzman and his ilk given a choice: prison or finish service in one of the historical roles of conscientious objector, such as a medic or chaplain’s assistant. See, I have a heart, especially for Quaker Buddhists.

  • Afghanistan Swears in First Democratic Leader

    There is more than infamy to the date December 7. Today, history added a glorious achievement born from the war against Islamic terror.

    For 30 years coups, assassinations and invasions were the usual means of power transfer in Kabul. But yesterday Hamid Karzai broke with bloody tradition and assumed office with a simple formula of words.

    Laying a hand on the Qur’an, Afghanistan’s first democratic president swore his allegiance inside the former royal palace that was once the scene of thunderous gunbattles but has since been renovated to welcome 600 guests.

    “We have left a hard and dark past behind us, and today we are opening a new chapter in our history,” said the blue-blooded Pashtun leader, who has led his country since the US-led invasion in 2001.

    But the perils of power reverberated silently during the short, simple ceremony, which opened with a reading of Islamic verses and songs from a children’s choir.

    Beside Mr Karzai sat Zahir Shah, the king who went into exile in 1973 after being deposed by his cousin. Outside the palace, US, Afghan and European soldiers buckled a tight security perimeter designed to deter Taliban attacks.

    Several streets were sealed off, surveillance helicopters droned overhead, and German peacekeepers patrolled on foot.

    But yet again the fundamentalists failed to deliver on threats of violence and mayhem, lending credence to suspicions that their insurgency has lost its potency.

    That triumph will have pleased the US vice-president, Dick Cheney, who flew in with the defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, to salute the Bush administration’s pet foreign policy success.

    Earlier, Mr Cheney rallied American troops in a speech at Bagram airbase, north of Kabul. “Freedom still has enemies here in Afghanistan, and you are here to make those enemies miserable,” he said.

    There is a long way to go to achieve enduring success in Afghanistan. Karzai is on record as desiring to end the power of both the local militias and the opium trade. In this endeavor, he will acquire a great many enemies, which only compounds the peril of radical Islamists and terrorists.

    Despite this, the swearing in of a democratically elected president is a testament to the hopes of the Afghan people and it should be celebrated. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer published an opinion piece doing that to a degree, along with a good look at what lies ahead.

    But an election is just one step. Now the country must move forward on the real difficult tests, such as creating a democratic identity and sustainable economy.

    It’s critical that the world (and especially the United States) present Karzai the resources to combat the Taliban and terrorist elements and to limit the drug trade. This is a tall order. The United Nations reports Afghanistan contributes 87 percent of the world’s opium and heroin.

    Democracy is an experiment; Afghanistan’s test is about to begin.

    If the Afghan people fail the test, it absolutely must not be from the neglect or half-measures of the U.S. and its allies.

  • Remember Pearl Harbor!

    Destroyer USS Shaw explodes, 7 DEC 1941

    December 7, 1941, a date which still lives in infamy.

    The Commissar has collected a list of sites with information on Pearl Harbor (hat tip to Ben). I expecially recommend the National Geographic entry.

  • Friends of Iraq Blogger Challenge Update

    As of this writing, bloggers and supporters have raised over $50,000 for the Spirit of America, a charity to extend good will to the Afghani and Iraqi people through a variety of projects.

    Have you donated? It’s not too late to join the Castle Argghhh! in the Fighting Fusileers for Freedom as we try to answer the challenge. Just click the image below to help.

    Join the Fighting Fusileers for Freedom!

  • Ukraine Rivals OK Vote Reforms for Rematch

    Time for an update on the circus that has become the Ukrainian presidential election: it’s a do-over.

    Ukraine’s political rivals agreed early Tuesday on legislation to ensure a fair vote during the rerun later this month of the fraud-ridden presidential runoff but remained divided on constitutional amendments trimming presidential powers.

    In addition to supporting changes in election laws, outgoing President Leonid Kuchma agreed to change the Central Election Commission, which was accused of covering up rampant fraud during the Nov. 21 runoff.

    On Monday, Kuchma and Russian President Vladimir Putin had said they would abide by the results of the new election, removing major question marks surrounding the Dec. 26 rematch. The vote was ordered by the Supreme Court, which last week struck down the election commission decision that Kremlin-backed Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych won the runoff.

    “Of course we will … accept the will of any nation in the former Soviet space, and will work with any elected leader,” Putin said during a state visit to Turkey.

    Yanukovych emerged from seclusion and declared he was confident of victory. Kuchma had supported Yanukovych in the runoff against Western-leaning opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko but has distanced himself from the prime minister over the past two weeks as protesters swarmed the capital.

    Tuesday’s agreement on electoral law changes was reached during six-hour talks involving Kuchma and the two candidates and brokered by European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana, Lithuanian President Valdas Adamkus and Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski.

    Kuchma emerged from the talks after midnight and said the parties had failed to reach agreement on his initiative to push through constitutional reform to transfer some powers from the presidency to parliament.

    Yushchenko had opposed the constitutional changes, saying that Kuchma and his allies want to weaken the presidency, fearing his victory in the election rematch with Yanukovych.

    However, just before the talks, Yushchenko’s allies in parliament reached a tentative agreement with pro-government lawmakers to approve changes in the electoral laws and the constitutional amendments on presidential powers simultaneously Tuesday.

    Should this fail, I would suggest best-of-seven Rock, Paper, Scissors.

  • US Against Moves to Alter Taiwan’s Name

    The ludicrousness of this story is exemplified in the above headline, taken from Yahoo! News. Taiwan isn’t moving to alter its name — it simply wants to call itself Taiwan.

    The United States said it is against moves by Taiwan to drop any references to China in its official name, warning it would disrupt the status quo in delicate cross strait relations.

    “Our view on that is that, frankly, we’re not supportive of them,” State Department deputy spokesman Adam Ereli said.

    Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian pledged at the weekend to push for increased use of “Taiwan,” rather than the island’s official designation of Republic of China (ROC).

    His move to alter the names of Taiwan’s missions abroad and state-run enterprises is sure to rile Beijing.

    China claims sovereignty over Taiwan, even though the two sides have been governed separately since the defeated nationalists fled to the island in 1949 after losing a civil war with the communists on the mainland.

    “These changes of terminology for government-controlled enterprises or economic and cultural offices abroad, in our view, would appear to unilaterally change Taiwan’s status and for that reason we’re not supportive of them,” Ereli said.

    China has vowed to reunify with Taiwan, by force if necessary, and opposes its entry to any world body as a country. Taiwan is forced to use the name “Chinese Taipei” in most international organisations and sports meetings.

    Ereli said the United States wanted to maintain stability in China-Taiwan relations.

    “That’s what we want to see,” he said. “And we are, therefore, opposed to any unilateral steps that would change the status quo.”

    And just what is that status quo that is so honky-dory that it must be maintained? Just this little mental exercise we’ve wrestled with for decades:

    The United States recognises China’s position that Taiwan is part of China but is bound by law to offer democratic Taiwan the means of self-defence if its security is threatened.

    Washington remains the leading arms supplier to Taiwan even though it moved diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing in 1979.

    Look, we all know that the two Chinas have long since become two different countries. Sure, they may be reunited someday, just like Hall and Oates may get back together and start churning out new hits. However, we should face the current reality. We’ve realized two separate nations with North and South Korea. We understood the distinction between East and West Germany. We’ve even put up with that crap from the Carolinas, Dakotas and Virginias.

    Taiwan, by every definition short of recognition, is already its own country. It’s time we stop saying “I Can’t Go for That (No Can Do)” to one of our strongest allies in the region.

  • Supreme Court: No Protection For Officer’s Sex Video

    My shock at this is that the damned thing ever reached the highest echelon of our legal system.

    The Supreme Court is backing a decision to fire a San Diego police officer who sold sexually explicit videotapes of himself, in and out of uniform.

    The unanimous opinion reversed an appeals court ruling in favor of the officer, who claimed his free speech rights had been violated.

    The officer was fired three years ago after a supervisor discovered the sex videos on eBay. The tapes showed the uniformed officer stripping off his clothes and performing a sex act.

    The supervisor charged the officer with violating department policies on unbecoming conduct and ordered a halt to the video sales.

    The officer complied but was fired after police officials found that his Internet profile on eBay still mentioned the striptease videos.

    The officer argued that the sex videos were made while he was off-duty and that they made no mention of his employment.

    Not even the libertarian side of me can find any support for this jackhole. As a silver lining for this idiot, he can now get back into the home entertainment business.

  • Eight Sue to Stop Stop-Loss

    A group of soldiers currently on active duty have filed suit to end or prevent extensions of their enlistment period.

    Eight U.S. soldiers serving in Iraq and Kuwait filed a lawsuit on Monday challenging the U.S. military’s “stop loss” policy, which forces them to serve beyond their enlistment contracts.

    Lawyers for the active duty soldiers sued Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and other senior military officials and asked to be immediately released from military service, saying they had served out their contracts.

    The U.S. Army has implemented a “stop loss” policy that prevents tens of thousands of soldiers designated to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan from leaving the military even when their volunteer service commitment is over.

    Spec. David Qualls said he enlisted with the Arkansas National Guard on July 7, 2003, under a program that allows a veteran to serve for one year before committing to full enlistment, but when he wanted to quit a year later, he was told he could not return home from Iraq to his wife and daughter in Arkansas.

    “What it boils down to in my opinion is a question of fairness,” Qualls, 35, told a news conference to announce the suit filed in the U.S. District Court in Washington. “I feel it’s time to let me go back to my wife.”

    ….

    Qualls, who said he supported the war in Iraq, took an 80 percent wage cut to serve his country and said he was falling behind on his car and house mortgage payments.

    “I spent the last nine months in that combat zone (in Iraq). I don’t think I am being unpatriotic. I believe I have fulfilled my duties,” he said of his wish to quit.

    I have sympathy for SPC Qualls and all those unwillingly extended. I have pity for their plights and various difficulties and am grateful for their service to date.

    That said, these eight now need to suck it up, square themselves away and do their duty.

    Lawyers representing Qualls and the others said the military’s decision to force people to stay longer than they had signed up for amounted to a back-door draft, a claim the military has strongly rejected.

    ….

    “When we ask a young person to risk his or her life in harms way, we owe it to that young person to fully explain the circumstances they may confront so far as the length of service,” said [lawyer Staughton] Lynd. “That was not done here.”

    Lawyer Jules Lobel, vice president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, said he would try to prove the soldiers were fraudulently induced to join the military in what he said was a classic “bait and switch” operation.

    I enlisted in the Texas Army National Guard on April 10, 1990. On that date, I was well aware that I could be activated and forced to leave my civilian life behind. On that date, I certainly knew that my enlistment could be extended at the military’s discretion. I knew this because it was made clear in the paperwork I signed that day before I raised my right hand.

    The print wasn’t that damned fine.

  • The Holiday Season is Here

    I spent the weekend with the girlfriend. The lights are up, the tree is decorated, the shopping has begun, and the halls are freakin’ decked.

    Are you ready? Ornaments, wrapping, eggnog and all that?

    How ’bout a little of that seasonal spirit of giving? I’m talking more than spare change to the bell-ringers as you push your cart o’ goodies out the store, though there’s nothing at all wrong with that. Have you considered the very worthy Spirit of America?

    Please help me and my fellow bloggers who have joined Castle Argghhh! in the Fighting Fusileers for Freedom as we try to answer the Friends of Iraq Blogger Challenge.

    Join the Fighting Fusileers for Freedom!