Egyptian Conference

I really hate to keep harping on this whole war thing, but you write about what you know. Maybe when I get far away from the desert sand...
Did anybody happen to see the coverage of the pseudo-Arab League conference in Egypt? I did. And if you are not up in arms right now about the outcome, then you should be. Two things of note came out of the meeting. The first is that the Iraqi delegation agreed that the coalition should begin removing troops in 2006. The second is that the insurgents have an "indisputable right" to fight against the occupation.
The first resolution is a thank you to President Bush. The White House has been put under increasing pressure from the Senate to begin the withdrawal of troops. Since most of the Senators passed a resolution calling for "reports" and "planning" for troop drawdowns, the Iraqi government decided to help save some face by saying that they feel confident in the assistance that the US has given the new Iraqi Army. Good on them. Make no mistake about it, for better or worse the people of Iraq owe their freedom solely to President Bush. They are free from a tyrannical government by his force of will alone. Some of you in the know understand that I am working with the new Iraqi Army. I will save my judgment of that organization for another time.
The second resolution is a capitulation to the Arab Street. If you ever need any proof of the duplicity of the Middle East, this is it. The resolution called for the condemnation of all insurgent attacks against civilians, but made it abundantly clear that attacks on coalition forces were an "indisputable right" of the attackers. Let me tell you how I interpret this. If something is a right, then it is legal. If it is legal, then one cannot be prosecuted for that action. If that action cannot be prosecuted, then it is not a crime and is therefore not worthy of arrest. Follow me on this one? It is not a crime to attack the people that are directly responsible for granting them that right.
So now it is not a crime to try to kill me. So long as innocent Iraqis don't get hurt as a result. Here is a selfish little recap for you. I helped liberate this country in 2003. I helped rebuild the infrastructure of Iraq in 2004. I am helping stand up the Iraqi Army in 2005. I think I have a damn sight more right to decide the fate of a free Iraq than people who are openly hostile to Iraq, or worse, complict in the actions of those wanting to overthrow the government. These people owe everything they have to the US military. And the freely elected government that we have protected and nurtured has spit in our face.
We were wrong in not demanding the complete surrender and humiliation of the Iraqis. For some reason they have a sense of entitlement that should have been scrourged from the national ego. We have forgotten the lessons of the British and MacArthur. It's not a fluke that the Union Jack stabilized the world for many, many years. It's not mere chance that Japan is now our partner in Iraq.
Getting rid of Saddam Hussein was not enough to cleanse the Arab pathos from Iraq. We must do more.

Buyers Remorse

Let's start with a recap of my morning. A Humve got blown up just outside of our perimeter and some soldiers got killed. I was called to put out the fire because I have some fire trucks at my disposal. I won't get into the details. I saw worse in Nasariyah back in 2003, but then again we were in an actual standup war at that point. I have lost count as to how many wounded I have seen and helped. I've put more men in body bags now than I can even remember. American. Iraqi. Soldier. Marine. Civilian. I've lost some friends over here as well. All to enemy fire. I've seen no atrocities nor committed any acts of valor. To be blunt, I'm over here just doing my job.
And that is what has sent me around the twist. I have no buyers remorse about the war. I've been here for three tours and still think that coming over here was the right thing to do. No WMD? No problem. Now that Saddam is gone a lot of people have developed a selective memory and have lost the bearing of their moral compass. I'm not going to go into the oft repeated justifications of the war, but just hear me out.
For the last 26 years, the Middle East has been festering. During the Cold War we were able to partially ignore the problem and to use it to our advantage. Defeating Communism was our primary goal and all others could wait. A lot of people are throwing bricks at President Reagan for leaving Beirut, but cleaning out the Middle East wasn't his focus. Burying the Soviet Union was. Reagan 1, Commies 0. After the wall fell, we did not want to hear of the next threat. We went to sleep. Not because the would be conflict had drained the national spirit, but because we willfully turned our back on the next threat in a selfish attempt to enjoy our peace dividend. We were determined not to be aroused from our slumber. We did not wake for attacks on our military barracks. We did not wake for attacks on our embassies. We did not wake for attacks on our naval vessels or attacks on our native soil. We became a self involved, navel gazing, equivocating country that wanted peace at any price.
And we paid the price for our lack of vigilance. Most of us finally realized that our Western way of life is better than the Eastern. We realize that the US is a force for good in the world. We want people to be free. If we are guilty of exporting our culture to the world it is because we want the rest of the world to enjoy the liberties that we have. If a person says he is going to kill you, you take him seriously. If that person does everything he can to undermine you, to provoke you, to kill you, then you eliminate him. Al Qaida is not the disease. It is a symptom. Saddam Hussein is not the disease. He was a symptom. The disease is Islamofascism. We are taking measures right now to treat the symptoms, but we are not curing the disease.
The reason for that is that the cure is too steep a price to pay for the American public. The disease will not be cured until the entire Middle East is crippled and humiliated. They must face the fact and admit their total surrender. Then, and only then, will we be able to rebuild a civilization that can exist with the rest of the world. But we do not have the stomach for such things.
It is much easier to lash out when popular opinion demands it and then withdraw when the task becomes too hard. We will retreat to our own shores. The pacifists will lick their bruised egos and wail of the impending retribution that we BROUGHT ON OURSELVES. The warriors will lament how we could have secured the peace that cost us so much blood. And we will be attacked again. And again.
I knew the reasons for invading Iraq. We were coming in to remove an old enemy and to remove a disease by the only proven way: fire. I do not look at the wounded and dead and weep at the loss. I swell with pride at their courage. I am humbled at their sacrifice. I know their blood has bought more of the victory of the clash of our civilization against that of the barbarian. I just wish that the rest of America didn't use the words we live, fight, and die by as the punch line to their jokes.
Did we do the right thing in Iraq? Yes. Could we have done it better? Yes. Do I have any regrets? Only that my country is not prepared to do all that it takes to complete the victory and ensure that our way of life goes on. Would I do it again knowing what I know now? Where do I sign up?

You already betrayed one generation of veterans. Now get the hell out of my way.

What I have been talking about

Anybody read the news lately? Seems like we have declared defeat in Iraq over the last few days. Good thing we get to hear about it from CNN.
I guess that most of you have noticed my, shall we say, lack of awe towards our elected law makers. If the best advice they can offer the executive branch on fighting a war is "YOU LIED TO US!!!!", I feel that we have learned nothing in the last 40 years.
I will have spent 22 months in Iraq at the end of this, my third tour. The months that I have not spent in Iraq since the opening of the war have been used for training to come to Iraq. I have been involved in this thing since the summer of 2002. I've spent 45 days in the US since January 2004. I've paid my dues and have a clue about what I am speaking. The war is not being lost in Iraq. It's being lost in DC. I used to wonder what it would be like to be sold out like the vets from Vietnam were. Now the protesters from the 60's are our law makers. And we have only ourselves to blame for putting them there.

37 days and a wake up. About a year after that until my contract ends. God, please don't let me be killed by someone else's stupidity or indifference.

My view of Roe v Wade

Seems like a lot of my thoughts are being written about by other people these days. That or I am just stealing their ideas. I don't know at this point. Just a little update about me: I'm sick right now due to something I ate. Typical Iraq deployment for me. Eat something, get sick for a few days, lose a few pounds. I detest this country.
Also saw the comments made by Congressman Murtha. Interesting times ahead for us over here.
Okay, here we go with Roe and that guy Wade. How many of you who are reading this think that abortion would cease to happen if Roe v Wade was overturned? How many think that Roe is the only thing that ensures that women can have an abortion? Let me put your fears to rest. The second that Roe is overturned nothing will happened. Why is that? Because most states had legislation on the books concerning abortion prior to 1973. How many of you think that it was illegal to have an abortion in the US prior to 1973? If you said yes, you need to find your history teachers and thank them for selectively teaching you their personal agenda. And then you need to blame yourself for remaining willfully ignorant or facts.
The FACT is that abortion was not illegal in the US prior to Roe. Read the history of the case. Some state legislatures, in an act of federalism, chose to make abortion in their states illegal. Some states legislatures, in an act of federalism, chose to make abortion in their states legal. For those of you having a hard time with this concept, you should refer to the word DIVERSITY. It is the alter at which we pray to the god of liberalism today, so you should know it.
I digress. So if nothing is going to happen if Roe gets overturned, why do we need to overturn it? Ah, good question. Maybe I was a little hasty when I said that nothing would happen concerning abortion if Roe is overturned. Some day, some state legislature may decide to break faith with DIVERSITY and decide to become a diverse state. They may choose to place severe restrictions on abortion, or GASP, outlaw it. That is the reason that we need to reverse Roe. It is to return the power of making law to the people, not to keep it with the government.
One of the outcomes of the reversal of Roe would also be the reversal of several other rulings. Does the government have the authority to take away your property and give it to another private party? Yes. Does the government have the ability to overturn laws that were made by your state representative. Yes. You thought this was about abortion? Wrong. I am pro-life. I think abortion, especially partial birth abortion, is hideous. Yes, I am a Christian. I object to abortion because it hurts the weak and innocent that we are made to protect and nuture. But if we think we are going to get rid of abortion, then we are mistaken. The founding fathers knew that issues were going to come up that they had no answer to. They wanted to make sure that states would be able to have the leeway to take care of those problems. They also knew that not everyone would agree on a certain law, so they made sure that each state could make it's own law. People would vote with their feet, and states would compete for population. We need to return the issue to the states and then I can decide which state I want to live in. And the first step in doing so is to repeal Roe v Wade.

Taxes

Okay, I'm sorry. I promised something on Roe v Wade this time, but something else caught my attention. I'll get into this subject a bit more in detail in a later column, but here is the gist: Everyone who is a citizen of the USA should pay taxes or no one should pay taxes.
You cannot turn on the tv without some left demogague complaining that the current tax cuts benefit only the rich. You cannot turn on talk radio without someone telling you how cutting taxes on the rich benefits the economy, and ergo, everyone. But lets get to the real problem as I see it. If you are not paying taxes while other people are, then you have no right to any of the government. This could also be applied to military service, but I will release my inner Heinlein later.
At this moment there is talk about eliminating the income tax for people who earn less than $50,000 (single income) or $100,000 (joint filing). While this is a boon for middle America, it does not bode well for the Republic.
I am worried that if we eliminate taxes for some and impose them on others, we will soon see some disturbing behavior in the rich. Why are we being taxed? Why do people who pay no taxes benefit from our money? Since we are paying for the government, why should we not have more say in how it is run and how our money is distributed? Why are we not granted special treatment?
And even though I am one of the ones who would pay no income taxes should the new thinking take hold, I would have to admit that the rich would deserve special treatment and more say. Sort of a political higher class. An example: You are a member of an organized labor union. You pay your dues and are a voting member on the agenda of your union because you are a dues payer. You are now told that some members will no longer have to pay dues but will have the same voting rights that you now enjoy. It is unfair for them to pay because they do not make as much as you do. Would you not feel insulted? Would you not feel that you are appreciated? I would. And I would lobby to make it possible for only those who paid dues to be able to vote on the agenda of the union. (To all you who know me, I am not a huge proponent of unions, but they make a good example for this case.) Why be a part of an organization that simply uses your money with no thanks? And why not change the organization to treat you differently than those that do not contribute?
Paying taxes is a mark of citizenship in this country. Either all should pay or none. How and why we collect taxes is another story.

Judicial Ruminations

This will be a short post as this topic can take up books. I wonder how many people have actually read The Federalist Papers? I know it is required reading on some college campuses. With that amount of people having read it, it boggles my mind how uninformed most of the debate on judicial nominations is. People see the Supreme Court as the supreme law of the land, and that is just sad.
Don't get me wrong here. The courts are the third branch of our government and have a very real purpose to perform. That purpose is to take the law as made by the congress and then to apply it to the cases that come before it. If there is no law, then that job is made very simple. "There is no law or precedent to follow. There will be no ruling on this case." Folks, it is that simple. When you have judges peering into the eminations from the pnumbra of the Constitution, then you end up with rulings such as we have seen in the last few decades.
There should be no objection to anyone being a strict constructionist. Those are the people you want on the bench. They are the ones who realize that the Constitution is there to define the limits of government power, with all other powers granted to the people and enacted by the legislature.
The judiciary should be non-political. Their job is to apply the law enacted by the representatives of the people. If they are tied to an ideology, right or left, then there is a temptation to apply their own ideas to their rulings. That is judicial activism. In my next column, I'll look at Roe v Wade. That is a particularly good case in how constructionist thought would have prevented the shrill yelling match that has gone on in this country for years.

The Wrong Conversation

The 800 pound gorilla sitting in the room is Iraq. I know. As I write this, I am 120 days into my third tour. I've been here from the beginning, spent all of 2004 over here, and now am riding out the last six months of 2005 over here. After 22 months, I feel that I have a pretty good grasp on what I am about to talk about. Anyone who feels otherwise, feel free to make a rational rebuttal.
The American people, the federal legislature, and the world are asking the wrong questions. Or to be more exact, making wrong statements. "Bush lied. We were misled. The war is unjust." Now hang on a minute before you start accusing me of being a part of the vast right wing conspiracy. The fact is that I AM a part of the vast right wing conspiracy, but just hear me out. There is an appropriate time and place for all of these accusations to come out. And that time is the day after we have achieved complete and total victory in Iraq.
It would warm my heart if I read the news everyday and there were arguements among lawmakers about how to more effectively and quickly prosecute the insurgency here in Iraq. There are no new ideas, only stale rhetoric. Or worse yet, a defeatist attitude that calls for a submission to the people trying TO KILL ME RIGHT NOW. I have neither the time nor the patience to converse with such people. They do not know anything about military thinking or decision making. Let me break it down for you.
Contrary to popular opinion of the last, say, four decades, the American military encourages detailed planning as well as the ability to quickly adapt to a change in plans. Planning creates a framework that allows for quick decision making when opportunites present themselves. We cultivate that mind set in order to exploit enemy weakness and to achieve endstates in the most efficient manner. The underlying principle to this planning and quick reaction to opportunities is that once forces are committed, there is not stopping until victory. Ah, but what if something goes wrong? Easy. That is what the commander is there for. He places himself at the point of greatest friction and is there to bring the full authortiy and resources of his office to make sure the objective is achieved. He may have to withdraw. He may find a better route. But what he does not do is say "My boss is completely ate up, his reasons for sending me here are flawed, and I'm getting the hell out of here before something worse happens." We plan for when things go bad. That is why a commander has a staff. They are there to point out options to him in case a plan doesn't go well. They are singularly focused on completing the mission. Once it is done they can sit around and do a hot wash to review the plan, but you can't do an after action report if you are all dead.
And that brings me back to my original point. The American people and the law makers are having the wrong arguements. There is no underlying theme of "Let's win this thing and then we can go back to see what was wrong." People are so tied into the casualties that they think that complaining about the dead and wounded is going to help. Politicians are populists, so they parrot what the people say. This defeatist attitude only erodes support for the mission. Lack of support for the mission means lack of support for the troops, no matter how many "Support Our Troops" signs you see. This breeds an attitude of providing minimal support because YOU KNOW THAT THEY WILL BRING THEM HOME IF WE DON'T WANT THEM THERE AND DON'T WANT TO SEND ANY MORE MEN AND MONEY. This is the exact right way to go about losing a war. The conversation that should be happening right now is how to apply the full weight of the United States of America to assure victory in Iraq. Think how refreshing that would be. Think of the global implications. THINK OF THE EFFECT ON THE AMERICAN FIGHTING MAN. I know my morale would soar if I saw the senate pass a resolution that they would mobilize the country to win the peace in Iraq. Hell, I'd sign up for another hitch if they passed something like that to completely wipe out Islamofascism in the Middle East. You can draw your own conclusions as to what that means...

The Future

Greeting Everyone,
Welcome to KneelingDrunkardsPlea, where grammar and sentence structure won't get butchered too badly, I hope. I'll get into my background throughout the upcoming postings. Besides, I want this to be about ideas and thinking, not about me. Of course my thinking is going to be directly influenced by my experiences in life, but again, you'll learn more about that as this blog progresses.
The main mission of bigcountry is to provide a paper trail for me and to serve as an online journal so that I can refernce my thoughts in later years. Why do I need a paper trail? Good question. I want to take back the country that has been stolen by bad laws, power-hungry and complacent politicians, and self-loathing.
For a long time I have read the news that comes from Washington and sat in wonder. Who are these people? What are they thinking? Then, after a few moments of reflection, I would convince myself that these were highly intelligent and capable people who were making informed and difficult decisions in order to lead the nation. Who am I to question these people? They are obviously smarter and better leaders than I am. I can't possibly do a better job than they. I am no longer that naive.
So I decided to take a lesson from my personal hero. When Ronald Reagan was with General Electric Theater, he made trips all over the United States. There he met with normal Americans and formed ideas that he made in speeches to General Electric workers. When he decided to run for governor of California, he had a paper trail that people remembered and looked back on. There was no stealth to his candidacy. Everyone knew exactly where he stood on almost every issue (the President was prolific, to be sure). I don't claim to be anywhere near the giant of President Reagan, but only fools don't follow the advice and example of successful people.
I intend to run for office in my home state of Texas. This will be my GE Theater. If you like this blog, please tell people you know about it. I want to get my ideas out. Some of you will agree. Some of you won't. But at least you will know where I stand. I hope to be prolific here. I will labor to keep soaring hyperbole and stale rhetoric out of my arguments. There will be no name calling or slanderous accusations. I will present you my arguments with as much fact and logic as I can (I'm deployed to Iraq at this time), so bear with me and correct me when I am wrong. I do not look for truth, I look for fact. Thank you for your time and I hope to see you back here soon.