Troops want to come home

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » July 16, 2003, 3:02 pm

http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/2003 ... 26562s.htm

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/Worl ... igade.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar ... Jul16.html

http://www.augustachronicle.com/stories ... .000.shtml

Soldiers say most of their work involves civilian contractor Kellogg Brown and Root, a subsidiary of Vice President Dick Cheney's former company, Halliburton Corp. The company has contracts to haul fuel, and 319th members are riding along as armed escorts.

"The main reason we're still here is to support Brown and Root," said Sgt. 1st Class David Uthe, 45, of Augusta.

The modern US army is VOLUNTEER. These are not the same poor, minority, uneducated, teenagers that were drafted to fight in Vietnam. These people are not fools. They want what was told to them. They want out.

Good for them.

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » July 16, 2003, 3:09 pm

Yes, it isn't obvious that noone, including soldiers, likes being shot at UNTIL YOU POST ABOUT IT!

Christ, what did you think they would say?

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » July 16, 2003, 4:15 pm

First- I was against the Iraqi invasion without WOMD proof, as were 99% of everyone else that was against it.

Second- a grunt does not have to like, or dislike it, their job is to do what they are told, that's what they are trained and paid for. No one *likes* being in a war zone, in a muddy trench, being shot at, killing other human beings. However, that's what they are there for, they do what their superiors tell them to, and they attempt to execute it flawlessly. *like* has nothing to do with it. If they wanted a democracy in the workplace, they would not have joined the military. Being ex military myself, I am surprised these *we're uncomfortable and tired of being shot at and ready to go home* comments are leaking out, normally those guys would be strung up for saying this crap to the media. We usually get briefed before having contact with media. Don't know what the heck is going on over there, but their pissing and moaning is ticking me off.

Let me say it again, I was against the Iraqi invasion. I want our troops out of Iraq YESTERDAY. My rant is not aimed at the policies that lead up to it, but at the soldiers bitching and moaning that are there.

Skogen · Post by **Skogen** » July 16, 2003, 5:08 pm

The fact that Dick Cheney's company got this contract without other companies even being allowed to bid just makes me want to find Mr. Cheney's home, and take a giant shit on his front porch.

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » July 16, 2003, 5:22 pm

Lol now theres effective imagery!

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » July 16, 2003, 6:23 pm

Second- a grunt does not have to like, or dislike it, their job is to do what they are told, that's what they are trained and paid for. No one *likes* being in a war zone, in a muddy trench, being shot at, killing other human beings. However, that's what they are there for, they do what their superiors tell them to, and they attempt to execute it flawlessly. *like* has nothing to do with it. If they wanted a democracy in the workplace, they would not have joined the military. Being ex military myself, I am surprised these *we're uncomfortable and tired of being shot at and ready to go home* comments are leaking out, normally those guys would be strung up for saying this crap to the media. We usually get briefed before having contact with media. Don't know what the heck is going on over there, but their pissing and moaning is ticking me off.

It's a sign of the times. The government cannot tell the soldiers one thing, then turn around and change their minds without having consequences. Everyone is accountable, even the military. This is not 1970. The American public will not allow our loved ones to be fucked again.

They liberated Iraq. That is what Bush and Co. sold Americans on. They did not mention years of continues occupation. That is why this will fail. The soldiers feel cheated, because they were cheated. They have every right to voice that opinion. They are the ones fighting and dieing for that very right.

I mean, I feel betrayed sitting at home living my day to day life. If I was in the military getting my dates pushed back every coupe of weeks, having to tell my wife that "no, I won't be coming home next weeek as planned", I would be goddamn furious, and rightfully so.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » July 16, 2003, 6:23 pm

Largest military in the world and they are playing nurse maid to a bunch of corporate oil thieves. I'd want to go home too. Too bad they are stuck there for another five or ten years, I hope they get used to living in a tent.

Skogen · Post by **Skogen** » July 16, 2003, 6:37 pm

kyoukan wrote:Largest military in the world and they are playing nurse maid to a bunch of corporate oil thieves. I'd want to go home too. Too bad they are stuck there for another five or ten years, I hope they get used to living in a tent.

Hey, the largest military in the world has been playing nursemaid in one form or another to corporate thieves for years! Why would this be any different? Whenever one heres the term "protecting US interests" that equates to playing corporate nursemaid.

....how much money did Pres. Johnson's wife's family have tied up in off-shore oil in the Gulf of Tonkin in the 1960's? The number escapes me now....

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » July 16, 2003, 8:03 pm

I think China and maybe 1 or 2 more countrys have a "bigger" military

IMHO get the troops the fuck outa Iraq, should have never been there obviously

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » July 16, 2003, 10:13 pm

My first thought after reading the title was "no shit"

Personally, I can understand WHY they want to come/go home, but I can also see why they are not able to be rotated yet. It's been what....4 months since the invasion? How long did past "occupations" last? I personally don't look at this as an occupation of hostile territory. I look at it as aiding the people to do what they need to do. Leave now and there would be a huge hole that the militants would be sucked in to.

But what the hell, Fuck it, we don't care about the people according to most people....well, most that post here.

Jassun · Post by **Jassun** » July 16, 2003, 11:39 pm

Fairweather Pure wrote:It's a sign of the times. The government cannot tell the soldiers one thing, then turn around and change their minds without having consequences. Everyone is accountable, even the military. This is not 1970. The American public will not allow our loved ones to be fucked again.

They liberated Iraq. That is what Bush and Co. sold Americans on. They did not mention years of continues occupation. That is why this will fail. The soldiers feel cheated, because they were cheated. They have every right to voice that opinion. They are the ones fighting and dieing for that very right.

I mean, I feel betrayed sitting at home living my day to day life. If I was in the military getting my dates pushed back every coupe of weeks, having to tell my wife that "no, I won't be coming home next weeek as planned", I would be goddamn furious, and rightfully so.

As much as I completely agree with you that our American fighting force should be pulled out of Iraq as soon as is safely and reasonably possible and as much as I appreciate your constitutional right as an American citizen to protest, lobby, and complain until our troops are safe and back in the good ole U.S., I am afraid I must disagree with you when you state that our troops have the right to voice that same opinion publicly.

Soldiers, Sailors, Flyboys, and Marines are held to higher standards and much more rigid laws than civilians. They are not allowed to voice such opinions, and for good reason.

The one small quote you used in your post was from a Sergeant First Class. For those of you unfamiliar with the rank structure in the U.S. Army, this is a guy/gal who should be held to a level of professionalism absolutely unparalleled in the civilian world. There are literally thousands of young Soldiers who look to this woman/man for leadership. He/She should set an example beyond any reproach, regardless of her/his personal opinion. This Sergeant First Class has just created a situation where his/her troops may doubt her/his sincerity and personal conviction the next time he/she issues orders, which although maybe dangerous, are imperative to the operational security and safety of the unit as a whole.

It is important to note that the Sergeant First Class was not active duty, but instead part of a reserve unit called to active duty. Unfortunately, I have witnessed this all too often in our reserve force. They certainly do not complain about the check they receive every month, which comes from YOUR tax dollars. However, they complain incessantly when asked to earn that money like the active duty force.

If there are any reservist reading this post that have served honorably, thank you for your efforts and I apologize if I have offended you.

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » July 17, 2003, 12:11 am

Consider that the there was only two companies large enough to handle the task Haliburton was tasked with.

The other company was Shlumberger and they're a French headquartered company.

So of course Haliburton is going to get the contract, the decision was made back when we're were quarreling with France about Iraq.

It's not some dark conspiracy. If you look into something like this you'll find rational explainations 9 times out of 10, otherwise it would be the lead story of CNN every day.

Wulfran · Post by **Wulfran** » July 17, 2003, 2:29 am

I never bothered reading the articles, but the sentiment doesn't surprise me. These guys were deployed to the Middle East when? Before Chirstmas to Saudi and Kuwait? Really who wants to be seperated from the family/friends/loved ones for 8-9 months? Who wants to be in a place where you're not sure if the people like you or hate you bad enough there are going to shoot when you don't expect it?

I didn't like the mission they were given (ala Krimson), but once the fighting started I wanted them to win as quickly as possible with as few casualties as possible. I understand they want to come home, and sympathize, but morally, I think the US (and UK and others in the "Coalition of the Willing") owe it to the people of Iraq to help put the country back together, after having destroyed it.

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » July 17, 2003, 9:35 am

I want to go home too. I'm fucking tired

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » July 17, 2003, 9:49 am

Fairweather Pure wrote: It's a sign of the times. The government cannot tell the soldiers one thing, then turn around and change their minds without having consequences. Everyone is accountable, even the military. This is not 1970. The American public will not allow our loved ones to be fucked again.

The government has every right to tell the soldiers one thing and to do another. You give up basic rights when you go active service, everyone that signs up knows this, it's explained to them, and they swaer the oath anyway. Again, our troops dont have the luxury of only following the orders they like, or the ones that happen to fall in line with their current politcal views. If that were the case, we would have factions following certain generals and anarchy like the roman legions battling each other for dominance over the kingdom.

Fairweather Pure wrote:They liberated Iraq. That is what Bush and Co. sold Americans on. They did not mention years of continues occupation. That is why this will fail. The soldiers feel cheated, because they were cheated. They have every right to voice that opinion. They are the ones fighting and dieing for that very right.

Right, Bush sold Americans on this, not the military. The soldiers can feel cheated, most of us do. My point here is that it's the publics and elected officals jobs to voice criticism, not the military. They cannot criticise their commander in chief, this is not Apple Computers we are talking about here where its ok to badmouth Steve Jobs even though you work for him. In short, they dont voice negative opinions to the media, only to their superiors.

Fairweather Pure wrote:I mean, I feel betrayed sitting at home living my day to day life. If I was in the military getting my dates pushed back every coupe of weeks, having to tell my wife that "no, I won't be coming home next weeek as planned", I would be goddamn furious, and rightfully so.

You have every right to be furious. I've been through it, it's not pretty being on a 6 month deployment, not seeing your wife and kids for half a year, then getting your dates pushed back. It sucks something fierce. But you fail to realize that's the deal we all sign up for. We know how long we will spend away from home if war breaks out, but we sign on the dotted line anyway to serve. Military peeps can voice their frustrations, just not to the media, but to superiors.

Get out of the civilian mindset when thinking about US troops, it's apples and oranges. The two do not share all of the same rights and privilages. That's just a fact.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » July 17, 2003, 10:02 am

The government has every right to tell the soldiers one thing and to do another

Yep and it's up to the citizens of your contry to ensure your political leaders don't flagrantly abuse the military by putting it to frivolous or inappropriate use.

I 100% agree with every other assertion you make about soldiering though Krimson. But the quote in the first post looks like a baldly stated fact rather than bitching to me. But then I couldn't be arsed to read the links.

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » July 17, 2003, 10:18 am

They joined the military, it is not day care, and they are not special, all these whiny little bitches need to stop thinking they are back on the block and STFU.

I did my nasty time in the desert and did not enjoy it, but you did not hear me whining about my government. These people are in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and as such I hope they are prosecuted to the fullest extent. I hope they enjoy Article 88, Article 89, Article 92, Article 94 Article 98, Article 104, and Article 134, all of which they are punishable under. And before some dumbass civilian says it, no they DO NOT have the right of free speech, and no they have NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. When you volunteer you are there to defend it not to have it defend you.

Bunch of sorry ass excuses for soldiers, with sorry ass motherfuckers like this along no wonder it took them so long to get to Baghdad.

Tuberok · Post by **Tuberok** » July 17, 2003, 11:06 am

Kylere, you must have served in a different nations military service during the period of time that I was on active duty. My understanding of my rights during my period of service differs vastly from your experience.

"And before some dumbass civilian says it, no they DO NOT have the right of free speech, and no they have NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS."

A. Sources of Rights
1. The sources of rights for service members include:
a. U.S. Constitution
b. Uniform Code of Military Justice
c. Manual for Courts-Martial
d. Statutes
e. Regulations
f. Executive orders

All US service persons are guaranteed full Constitutional rights. The difference is that Service persons are subject to UCMJ laws and regulations on top of state and federal legal codes.

B. Freedom of Speech

Service members, like other citizens, have a right to express themselves. However, the right to engage in free speech does not provide an absolute immunity from subsequent punishment if the speech violates a criminal law. In the military, such criminal laws include:
1. Disrespectful speech toward superiors;
2. Use of words or gestures that might provoke a fight;
3. Disclosure of classified information;
4. Discussing official matters outside of the military without proper authorization

Free speech is insured as long as a soldier adheres to the UCMJ guidelines as stated above.

Officers on the other hand have many more restrictions placed on them in the arena of free speech due to the adherent conflict of interest when placed in a position of command and the responsibility to maintain order and morale of troops in said command.

So, how was the Red-Army?

masteen · Post by **masteen** » July 17, 2003, 11:18 am

Tuberok wrote:All US service persons are guaranteed full Constitutional rights. The difference is that Service persons are subject to UCMJ laws and regulations on top of state and federal legal codes.

B. Freedom of Speech

Service members, like other citizens, have a right to express themselves. However, the right to engage in free speech does not provide an absolute immunity from subsequent punishment if the speech violates a criminal law. In the military, such criminal laws include:
1. Disrespectful speech toward superiors;
2. Use of words or gestures that might provoke a fight;
3. Disclosure of classified information;
4. Discussing official matters outside of the military without proper authorization

So they violated rules 1 & 4. When do the court martials start?

Tuberok · Post by **Tuberok** » July 17, 2003, 11:29 am

You are absolutely right, they could possibly be brought up on charges under those provisions. But as with all things in perspective do you for a second think that those charges are often brought when the impact to morale in the remainder of the division would be huge especially for general comments made that did not divulge military secrets but instead offered general opinions.

There obviously are restrictions to free speech and any serving soldier has to be careful of what they say. My only point was that, in fact, US soldiers are guaranteed constitutional rights and are provided for the right of free speech.

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » July 17, 2003, 2:32 pm

Have to agree with Wulfran.

Maybe the action in Iraq wasn't the right one. That's really another debate. Now that it has taken place, those forces (US forces, not necessarily the specific units stationed there at the moment) have to stay until some sort of order is restored.

Any new government in Iraq is going to have a shitstorm to deal with. Pulling out before anything has been established would be a hell of a disservice to the Iraqi people, who don't have a lot of historical reasons to like the US anyway.

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » July 17, 2003, 4:51 pm

If some other company had been chosen to help re build parts of Iraq, I'd bet they wouldn't need armed escorts because Iraqi militants would surely leave them alone!

It's not like the government has chosen Halliburton for huge works before. It's not like Cheney has absolutely nothing do with the selection process. It's not like only a handful of companies around the world could have taken on a project this big.

I've never done time in the military, although I'm most likely going to enlist in a few months, so I'd feel like a hypocrite criticizing these guys who have been away from their families for several months in a desert half a world away. I'm just going to agree with Krimson on his sentiments.

kyoukan wrote:Largest military in the world and they are playing nurse maid to a bunch of corporate oil thieves.

Whose oil has Halliburton stolen?

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » July 18, 2003, 12:06 am

If you say something in public that serves to reduce the morale of your fellow soldiers, you're probably doing something wrong.

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » July 19, 2003, 8:25 am

Krimson Klaw wrote:normally those guys would be strung up for saying this crap to the media. We usually get briefed before having contact with media. Don't know what the heck is going on over there, but their pissing and moaning is ticking me off.

Looks like I was right after all. Good riddance. US military has no room for pissing and moaning about foreign policies and government politics. If you want to do that, stay a civilian or hold public office. Once you don the uniform, you zip your lip and do what you are told. Let the civilians do their job and you do yours.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... 248299.DTL

"It was the end of the world," said one officer Thursday. "It went all the way up to President Bush and back down again on top of us. At least six of us here will lose our careers."

First lesson for the troops, it seemed: Don't ever talk to the media "on the record" -- that is, with your name attached -- unless you're giving the sort of chin-forward, everything's-great message the Pentagon loves to hear.