Monday, September 10, 2007

Listen up, THAT is how you complain!

Fantastic!
I thoroughly enjoyed "Bad Boy's" recitation of the various crimes and miscarriages of justice that the Democratic party is guilty of. Eloquently spoken, and I'm glad to see a kindred spirit has joined our ranks. From Kennedy to Reid, to Pelosi to Schumer, these people have engaged in a level professional sophistry which allows empires to crumble and causes republics to fail. And as the anniversary of 9/11 approaches these political Jacobins seek to smear the reputation of our most honored servicemen. That's correct, Reid has taken to calling General Patraius a liar. In preparation for the "surge report" to be issued Tuesday (9/11), Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D) NV has said "this man has been known to make statements in the past that weren't supported by the facts." The leader of the senate has taken the step of calling our battlefield commander a liar. Truman despised MacArthur, but did him the service of "asking" for his resignation and a ticker-tate parade. Our battlefield commander, a man whom has given his life to defending our rights, has to now listen to a corrupt and broken man tarnish his good name. Despicable. What has become of this once proud and patriotic party? They are democrats (small "d"), no more.

Also, given his eloquent prose, I would like to take this opportunity to personally thank "Bad Boy" for his service to this nation .. thank you sir. And in that spirit I will offer this piece which I wrote on the one year anniversary of 9/11. Now six years past it sits framed on my wall as a reminder to me of the sacrifice of men like you, and my little brother, proudly serving in the US Army.


On Point
I was recently asked whether or not I thought our president, and America in general, were on point with a foreign policy that seems to be leading to an inevitable invasion of Iraq.
On point.
Those words instantly conjured up a host of images. Images of men’s faces that I have seen throughout the years in John Wayne and Audie Murphy war movies. Faces of the “point man.” He is the soldier whom walks ahead of the rest of his platoon that’s out on patrol. He walks out ahead first. He meets the enemy first. He meets death first. He secures the area first and then signals to the rest by waiving them forward. “Come along”, he says, “this area is safe, I have secured it.”
That sounds a lot like America to me. We are history’s point men. We walk ahead of the rest of the world in meeting those who live to kill freedom. We land first, we die first, we defeat the enemy first, and we leave the battlefield last. We signal to the rest of the world, “come forward.” In total, we lead.
Why?
It is because of our intimate knowledge of freedom. Freedom is not some abstract ideal to us. It is a tangible, living, breathing being that we can reach out and take a hold of, as it has taken a hold of us. It flows through our courts, churches, and homes. It is in our prayer meetings and at our dinner tables. It races down our highways, and screams through the air on the wings of our jets. We know it, and more importantly, it knows us. It knows that we are its defender, its keeper, and that it will always have a home as long as we hold breath.
We go out on point.
We signal to the rest of the world “come along.
" Liberty echoes in the sound of our soldiers boots hitting the ground, and freedom smiles. For it knows that once again we are out on point.
Our blood is still wet on the Sands of Iwo Gima. Sailors are still trapped at the bottom of the Pacific. Dog tags still lay buried without owner on the Korean Peninsula. And men still cry at the Vietnam Memorial.

And tomorrow, we will get up, and go out on point again.

FR.
9/11/02

3 comments:

Titus said...

Well, you certainly are proud of that piece, aren’t you? You’d think I’d have it memorized after 6 years of so…

I just wanted to point out one thing about what you wrote. I have agreed that the “Declaration” is a wonderful and telling work… if nothing else, it gets the mind working in new and different directions, doesn’t it?

I like Petraeus… don’t get me wrong here. He did an outstanding job of whipping his “areas of operation” while commanding the 101st in Iraq, and it shouldn’t be forgotten that the situation in Nineveh didn’t fall apart until AFTER he (and the 101st) left. HIS was the plan (the Petraeus Doctrine) that outlined the surge in troops, and he has commented in the past that it was long in coming.

No, my beef is with your perception of history. Specifically, your analysis of the Truman-McArthur spat and Reid-Petraeus. Reid is an idiot… of the first order, in fact. Mayor of Crazy-town. It is completely obvious that his opposition to the “surge” is what is behind his critique of Petraeus as CUSF-Iraq, if for no other reason than Petraeus is one of the authors of the plan.

While I see the correlation between the two “political” versus “military”… its wrong to think that Truman asked for McArthur’s resignation. The resignation was given AFTER Truman relieved him from his command in Korea in 1951 for blatant insubordination… something the Joint Chiefs patently agreed with, by the way. The ticker-tape parade was given by the local municipal authorities in the 5 boroughs of New York City… not by Truman.

If you wish to compare Truman with Reid, then you can only go so far as saying he was an idiot for not firing Mac’s ass sooner, and for not sitting his boney butt in front of a Court Martial for his actions in trying to start a war with China. Truman seemed to get awfully sentimental in regards to Mac… because I simply don’t see the reasoning behind letting him make that “farewell” speech in front of Congress, and probably going a long way to giving up his next term as President because the country felt he had “wronged” Mac.

Mac did more for this country than nearly any other three General Officers combined… but he seriously fucked up in Korea and SHOULD have faced the music. Instead, he was allowed to give his “fade away” speech in front of the entire US Congress, and “retire” with as much dignity as any former military commander since Winfield Scott.

Petraeus DOESN’T deserve the heat that Reid is heaping on him… Mac did deserve to be fired by Truman.

T

Baddboy said...

Thanks for the glowing review but I can't take credit for the writing although I do beleive in what is says without question. It was written by a gentleman who was in the Navy with my wife and has since if I'm not mistaken gone into the political consulting biz.

The only thing that I think that is missing from it and the crimes for which I beleive Clinton to be the most guilty is the deaths of the US Army Rangers involved in operation Ranger. It's not that he sent them or that he employed them but that he left them without the support they beleived necessary and were denied. AC-130 gunships were available and requested prior to the battle and the fact that he had all of the armour withdrawn from somalia even though they asked for it to stay is a travesty and for that he should have been tried along with the SECDEF for Dereliction of duty and as far as I'm concerned murder.

Bosnia was another travesty and the fact that Clinton wouldn't put ground troops in sooner makes him a coward and only proved his impotence when it came to being the CIC, and lets not forget Rowanda and what could have been avoided if we hadn't left that up to the UN and Kofi Anan who at the time was in charge of the Rowanda mission.

F. Ryan said...

Fair enough - you are dead right on the Truman/Mac events, they are poor comparisons to the Reid situation. I guess that being in a hurry I reached for a quick political v military scenario and that one was at the top of my head. In no way, even with Patrauis's considerable actions am I comparing him to MacAurthur - that wouldn't be fair to any man in uniform. And I SURE AS HELL didn't mean to compare Reid to Truman. Harry wouldn't even recognize his party today. And my guess is no right winger 60 years into the future will be naming his son after Reid ... I shutter to think anyone will. I have to go now, in order to read James's manifesto on losing Texas in the electoral college ... err I mean "New Deal 08" (snicker... just kidding Jambo!).
FR