Remembering what's important

I spend much of everyday sailing through an endless number of blogs, news articles, and forum posts that keep me informed on what's going on in the world. Obviously, much of it has been about the election. Sometimes we forget that there are US soldiers fighting in remote areas of the world, keeping us safe.

As I said a few days ago, Iraq seems to have settled down so much, that the "War on Terror" seems out of mind. I refuse to call it that any more. Terror is a tactic, not an enemy. The enemy is radical violent Islamofascism, more dangerous than Hitler, 1940s Imperial Japan, or even the old Soviet Union. That's because they are everywhere. The 19 September 11th hijackers lived here for sometime before launching their "Pearl Harbor."

Today, we have some of America's most dedicated servants of our nation in places working to fight those who plan to hit us again. Much of the worst of it is going on in Afghanistan. I came across this piece in one of my news media surfing sessions. It was eloquent, even-handed, and passionately courageous. It's from a young man who, on his third tour of the Middle East, as a National Guard member, was just killed by an IED in Afghanistan. I really want you, dear reader, to READ THIS WHOLE LETTER. I have bolded certain sections if you must skim. Men like Captain de Solenni need to remembered, thanked, defended, and given our highest mental and physical support. Now, from a letter of a few weeks ago by the late Capt. de Solenni to Crescent City, California Triplicate reporter Adam Madison:

Hi Adam, my name is Capt. Bruno de Solenni and I am writing you in regards to your article that I finally was able to read online.

I really wasn't sure what to expect, especially nowadays with some of the crap that you read in the news. I will say that I was surprised and pleased that it wasn't over-sensationalized and you kept a good theme on the topic.

I guess the main reason I am writing you is to thank you for your support and the point of view that you took on the article. I know that sometimes it is difficult to actually print something without being biased and taking just one side. But I will tell you the truth and give you an honest opinion about my life in the National Guard, about the war over here and many of the decisions leading to my third tour in the Middle East.

First off, when I first joined the National Guard, back in 1996, I had no idea that I would be here today. I do remember making the decision on Christmas Day when I was about 20 years old and felt like I was going nowhere with my life and needed to take a new direction. As my father and mother had stated earlier, I was always fascinated with history and the military, and was amazed at some of the hardships my grandfather endured in both WWI and WWII.

So the following Monday on the 26th I called a recruiter, and took the asvab test on the 27th in Eureka. Three days later I was down at the Oakland Meps station getting sworn in as a 62E (heavy equipment operator). When they asked when I wanted to go to Basic, I told them, "how about next week?" and they kind of laughed at me and explained that the soonest they could get me in was 30 days. On the 29th I boarded a plane and my life was forever changed, without me even knowing what lay ahead.

Eventually, a few years after joining, I did decided to go back to college at Southern Oregon University in Ashland, Ore., where there was a GOLD (Guard Officer Leadership Development) program that allowed me to earn a federal commission as an Army officer while I continued to work toward my degree (which the National Guard also paid for).

In a sense, I was doing exactly what the National Guard said I could do if I joined … Finally, on May 11, 2001, I received my commission as a young, immature, 2nd lieutenant full of piss and vinegar still not knowing exactly what I was getting into.

When Sept. 11 happened, it was then that I realized that things were going to be very different for me and the rest of this country. One month later our battalion received the alert order that we would mobilize the following year to fill in on the current MFO (Multi National Force and Observers) mission in Sinai, Egypt. After returning from Egypt, I was home for eight months before volunteering again to go to Iraq for OIF II. It was there I truly (became) an infantry officer and learned a lot about myself and people in general.

Upon my return from Iraq, I was positive about what was going on there but very resentful at the way the media was covering the war over there. In my own view, I personally feel that some of the media deliberately fueled that war based on their own biased political views and I still hold them accountable for their actions.

Something that still upsets me is the fact that they exploited some of the crimes soldiers committed over there as a reflective view to the rest of the world of what our armies stood for. I am not saying that we didn't make mistakes, we did make them and we have painfully corrected them.

After returning from Iraq I took a break and just stuck to the one weekend a month traditional Guard and used my experiences from Iraq to lead a recon/sniper platoon out of the Grants Pass Armory for about 2.5 years. Then I received the opportunity to come to Afghanistan and work as an Embedded Trainer with the Afghanistan Army.

Some of the biggest dilemmas that I think we have faced here are mostly the fact that Afghanistan seems to have been put on the back burner up until a few months ago when the casualties here began to exceed those in Iraq where there are four times as many soldiers. Our true problems here are definitely reflective of the Pakistani border and the lack of troops covering it, which has been an issue for years and is being exploited by the Taliban as they train freely in Pakistan, unopposed by anyone.

In my opinion, Afghanistan does need a troop surge of American soldiers as well, otherwise we will only be able to sustain combat operations with minimal effect of containing Taliban insurgents. As I speak about this, these are only my views and opinions based on my experiences.

Even though I am now recuperating in the rear and doing fine, much of my time along with other teammates has been spent in the Helmand Province working with a handful of British soldiers in small isolated FOBs conducting offensive operations with the Afghan National Army. Our task is to mentor them during combat operations and to provide both air support and indirect fire support, which seems to sometimes be a daily necessity over here.

The good days over here are when we are truly sticking it to the Taliban in a firefight that is in our favor and you just dropped 130 105mm rounds on their position. Or when a ... hot F-15 pilot flies over your head strafing the Taliban with his Vulcan cannons.

The (bad) days are when you are covering up your your sergeant major from being exposed to the dust-out of a Chinook helicopter that is landing to medivac him out. At the same time he cries because he doesn't want to leave his team as he lies there half paralyzed with shrapnel in him, while fluids are coming out of his eyes and ears signifying severe brain trauma, (meaning we cant give him morphine).

The bad days are when you put your buddy in a body bag and you don't even recognize him because his limbs are missing and there holes in him everywhere. The miracles are when his last words are, "tell my wife and kids I love them," before he dies in his best friend's arms after struggling for several agonizing minutes to get the words out because there is a fist-size hole in his head.

And last but not least, the best days are when an Afghan comes up to you thanking you for everything that you have done to help them and for making their (home) a better place now that the Taliban are gone.

If anything, this is probably the biggest reason why I proudly enjoy being over here. I can't explain it to anyone and there is no description of what it feels like, but it was the same feeling I got when I was in Iraq as well. And I am sure it's the same feeling that generations of American soldiers before me have gotten as they fought and sacrificed their lives for the freedoms that we enjoy today.

Perhaps the biggest thing that has made being over here much more bearable, is the amount of public support that we have received from people. Getting a care package or a letter of support when you are out in the middle of nowhere from a complete stranger, thanking you, does make the day seem a little better.

I would especially like to thank my Aunt Jan Martin, and The local Troop Support organization who have provided care packages to soldiers serving overseas and have volunteered endless hours of their time and energy making our lives easier. The British soldiers (who don't get anything) are extremely grateful as well.

Along with this, I would especially like to thank the members of the VFW who donated several hundred dollars of G.I. shirts to the company of Afghans that I have been mentoring. You have all truly made my life and my job easier. Without your support, life would not be as pleasant.

Last but not least I would truly like to thank everyone who has supported the soldiers and the efforts toward supporting these wars even when there wasn't an end in sight. Until about 6 months ago there wasn't a news outlet that was saying that the Iraq war was winnable and that this was another vietnam in the making. Had we let the politicians get ahold of this war it would have been.

Fortunately our president (who is not perfect) has stood his ground against the naysayers who deliberately exploited the death of American soldiers for their own political gain, showing no regard to their families and loved ones who are still mourning them to this day.

I can understand what it was like for Vietnam veterans who returned from the war and were spat upon for wearing their uniform and standing up for what they believed in. Unfortunately this is still all-too-true for many of the British soldiers returning home to their own country. There are even certain ethnic religious neighborhoods where they cannot even wear their uniforms because they will be beat up in their own country.

I pray to God we never come to that and thank the fact that what has changed drastically between Vietnam and now is that even if the public doesn't support the war, they still support troops which makes a huge difference. This is especially comforting if you are one of those soldiers walking through the airport wearing your uniform and coming home on leave or returning from a deployment.

Once again, I cannot thank everyone enough for their support and all that they have done …

Sincerely,

Capt. Bruno de Solenni

God speed Captain de Solenni.

"Where do we get such men?"
James Michener, Bridges at Toko-ri, 1953

What will be the deciding factors?

Whew. What a week. From financial crisis, to Obama's possible violation of the Logan Act, to Sarah Palin's email getting hacked (and since he was critical of it, Bill O'Reilly's website) to McCain calling for the scalp of Chris Cox of the SEC.

What is going on here?

Besides a heated and close election, it's a critical period of deciding who is going to lead the free world during a time of financial tsunamis, culture wars, and the constant threat of Islamofascism. Where do I start?

Let's start with the war, because it actually leads to Obama's scrape with what has been considered to be a long-time tradition of not interfering with the US government's ability to negotiate agreements with foreign powers.

The war in Iraq seems to winding down. Both parties seem to be admitting that, although the Democrats remain convinced that this war was not just a mistake but an act that put the country in bigger danger than it was. I don't intend to get into that issue, having covered it before. But it did lead to a meeting that Obama had with the foreign minister of Iraq during his trip in this summer that has led to a minor firestorm. Many Americans believe that the US news media has been openly slanting the news in favor of Obama over the last several months. Go back and read my last few posts on the polling data on that. It is the opinion of a large majority of Americans, even many of Obama's own supporters.

I guarantee you that if McCain had done this, you would never have heard the end of it. But since that is true of so many things at this point in the election, let's not waste our time.

Amir Taheri of the NY Post wrote an article stating that Obama had requested that the Iraqis hold off on completing their withdrawal agreement with the United States until after our elections had chosen a new president and a new Congress. Of course, Obama was expecting that the elections would produce a more Democratic Congress and a new Democratic president: Barack Obama. The Iraqis were understandibly taken aback by this interference in the negotiations by an opposition leader; this is the kind of brazen ploy you would expect from a banana republic, not the most powerful nation on earth. In case you think I am overstating the problem, and the tradition of non-interference in US foreign policy, please read this summary article by Taheri on the events and their meaning. More than anything, it communicates to many foreign leaders that Obama is...well...different. Perhaps he should have gotten better advice, since he is new at foreign policy, but it's not like his 300 advisors couldn't have caught him before he went overseas and said to him, "This trip is to listen, not to tell them what you want."

The Logan Act goes all the way back to the John Adams administration, and while the Obama campaign has forcefully argued that Obama was misinterpreted by Taheri...well, as you can see by the article, he claims he was only going by what Obama and foreign minister Zebari said about the meeting. This issue may come up in the debate this Friday in Mississippi, when foreign policy is supposed to be the main topic.

Let's address the financial crisis. This is an area where I have had some personal experience, having been involved in retail financial management before my career change into teaching. I strong urge you to read this succinct article by Jim Manzi in NRO. Forget that it is a conservative magazine, this guy understands the credit markets. This is, in the end, NOT a partisan issue, although it may be impossible for a while because of the campaign. But it IS about our financial survival as we try to dodge the iceberg looming in front of our ocean liner. Meanwhile, you can realistically expect both candidates to blame the party or backers of the other candidate. Which one will voters trust to handle this minefield?

Who is to blame? Frankly, I think it's the one entity that ALWAYS gets away with being complicit but never held responsible in this country: CONGRESS. They decided to allow the quasi-government lending authorities like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac the authority to basically lend mortgage money to borrower who past experience has shown are likely to be unable to repay the money. This article shows that the first big move in this direction goes all the way back to the Clinton years. And it was all to increase home ownership of a large voting population that generally votes Democratic. But Republicans went along because who wants to vote against minorities owning homes: are you a racist or something? If not, then VOTE FOR IT!!

It's much easier to blame a single person: the president, the speaker, a majority leader, than to blame 535 elected officials. But that is who makes the laws. These are the people who are fulfilling the prophecy of Alexis de Tocqueville in 1831. The Frenchman made a statement, in his brilliant analysis of the new republic,Democracy in America, when he said

The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.

Of course, the New York Times suggests that President Bush is to blame. For once, the Washington Post disagrees, but then they have to find some way to be distinguishable from the Gray Lady from time to time. The blatant bias of the news media this year has been...historic. William Randolph Hearst, of "yellow journalism" fame, would be proud.

On the Palin email front...where are all the civil liberties groups and their outrage? The sound of crickets from the neighborhood of the ACLU and People for the American Way is deafening. Conservative women don't have rights...they can only be accused of violating them. Especially if they want someone fired who tasers a 11 year old child. I'm sure we'll get more breathless stories from the 30 odd muckrakers going through the Wasilla archives looking for more breaking stories about the governor's college transfers and her brother-in-law's scrapes with the law TWENTY YEARS AGO. Important information in these boring news days...

And what of McCain's call for the firing of SEC Chairman Chris Cox? Was he overreacting? Perhaps. This was not the time to put a new man in charge of the SEC when things are this tense. This faux pas rings of Obama's mistaken notion that the place to solve the Georgian crisis was the Security Council of the UN, where Russia has a veto and would certainly use it to kill any attempt to sanction Russia for it's invasion of the tiny former USSR republic. But considering that we may have only been hours away from a total financial meltdown on Thursday, perhaps his outrage that more oversight wasn't evident from the financial market's watchdog could be understandable. Senator Obama claimed that McCain "panicked", but then Obama's response on Friday was basically "I'll get back to you."

Finally, the guys who would like to kill all Americans were busy tonight. The Marriott Hotel in Islamabad, Pakistan was bombed. That is the picture you see at the top. Reports say they may have been after some high level CIA or US military personnel in the attack. Of course, you have to wonder who had the information as to the name and location of said US personnel. This week has certainly been a reminder of what a dangerous world it is; dangerous to your financial, moral, political, and physical health. The nation will be choosing the man responsible for protecting Americans in just 45 days.

Edit: If you think I am wrong about the war in Iraq having turned around, read this article this morning by this stunned reporter in the New York Times, of all places.

A fundamental change in fortunes?

I want to apologize for not putting up a new blog post earlier. It seems that once school starts that my focus stays on the job that I am getting paid for!

There is no question that it has been a intense few weeks since John McCain showed that the old fighter pilot still has it in him to surprise people with his selection of Alaska governor Sarah Palin. To those of us who follow politics, the governor's poise and conservative views are familiar characteristics of this 44-year old "hockey mom."

The governor was the subject of an unprecedented examination by the mainstream (and tabloid) media the likes of which we have never seen. Some will argue that she has come through that with varying degrees of success. If there are some alarming discoveries, don't expect that this would be necessarily released as soon as it is discovered. Scandals and damaging stories are most effective when they come out in a drip-drip-drip fashion. The problem for Obama has been the slew of hard questions about him AND his running mate. Biden's son resigned his position as a lobbyist because of accusations that it undermines Obama's assertion that he doesn't seek the aid of the K Street lobbysts. McCain has run a series of hard-hitting ads on Obama and his positions on education, Iraq, the economy, and the consistent questions about his readiness to lead or the consistency of his "hope and change" mantra with moments such as the "lipstick on a pig" comments. All of this has put Obama on the defensive where no candidate wants to be with 7 weeks to go in an election.

Palin agreed to a thorough grilling by ABC anchor Charlie Gibson that will be analyzed for the next several weeks but seems to have had a net neutral at the worst.

Now comes evidence that ABC edited her interview in order to make her look more extreme to the viewers. When you realize that the McCain campaign was accused of "protecting" Governor Palin from the media, and then see the way they chopped up her responses in the interview with Gibson, you can understand the McCain campaign's reluctance to have Mrs. Palin defined by the skill of the editor's knife. Disgraceful. I anticipate that one of the unintended consequences of this election will be the complete exposure of the near criminal bias of our national news media. This isn't just my opinion. Poll after poll after poll has shown that a large majority of the voters believe that the media is biased in favor of Senator Obama. When you have something as important as a presidential election in the hands of editors who can make anyone look extreme or stupid by the use of the editing room, that is unacceptable. Who do these people think they are? They are no longer the unquestioned "gatekeepers" of knowledge and opinion. The new media, led by internet bloggers and YouTube videos, are the Davids that will sink the stone in the forehead of the media Goliaths. I can't say that many will cry a river for them when it is over. There is a certain sense of schadenfreude about watching their earnings and stock price decline as well.

I will leave it to each reader to judge her qualifications (certainly there has been a wide range of persons chosen to be vice-president in our nation's history...witness Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Dan Quayle or Harry Truman...quite a diverse group). What I want to analyze in this post is the effect it has had on the race.

There is no question that it has energized McCain personally, and much of what we call "the Republican base." This means mainly conservative Republicans, who have often looked askance at McCain because of his open criticisms of President Bush and a willingness to reach across the aisle and work with Democrats rather than assail or defeat them. This "maverick" nature is a characteristic that appeals to some Democrats and many independents. Will he be able to keep both groups satisfied?

Palin's selection has led some Republicans to conclude that McCain is setting up the party for a conservative agenda for years to come with the Alaska governor's promotion and exposure to a national audience. Even should McCain lose this election, she has become a world-recognized figure. She will not become a trivia question like Geraldine Ferraro did after the 1984 election.

Already this wider question of the impact on the race is being answered with a consistent reading of the polling data. Just about every major national poll is showing the race either tied or with a slight McCain lead. See here, here, here and here. This is quite a reversal from the end of the Democratic Convention. Could this simply be a factor of McCain's "convention bounce?" Yes, perhaps. If this coming week ends with things basically unchanged, then McCain has gone from being the underdog to the front-runner.

It seems the Obama campaign's internal polling must be showing them at least the same kind of movement as they announced a major revision of their campaign strategy just the other day. This also came in the wake of Obama's two-hour meeting with the last Democrat to win the presidency: Bill Clinton. Ironically, as successful as Mr. Clinton has been in his own election fortunes, his record of helping others get elected, when he campaigns for them, is pretty poor; note that his wife is watching these events from the sidelines...except in states where she can raise money to retire her campaign debt! His emotional stability has even been called into question when he was campaigning for his wife this past year.

Some of Obama's "new strategy" ads blew up in his face immediately. He tried to use a whimsical approach accusing McCain of being out of touch because he doesn't personally read his email. The fact is, that it was widely reported, in McCain's last run for the presidency that because of his torture in a North Vietnamese prison, he CAN'T use a keyboard. But as ranking member of the Senate Subcommittee on Technology, he was one of the first in that august body to use the Web and he has always dictated his emails to his wife Cindy so that he can stay on top of things. This is an amazing goof by the Obama camp...and ironically, one that a simple Google search would have prevented. This does not inspire public confidence that Obama is careful before he opens fire on his enemies and calls into question whether his staff is "ready for prime time."

But national polls are little more than media fodder, the real fight is in the states. In this area, things are even more alarming for the Obama Camp. Suddenly, states that Gore and Kerry won against Mr. Bush are in play. Polling in "blue" states such as Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, even New Jersey, are putting McCain in striking distance. Western blue states may soon come into play, as Washington now seems to be. Look for McCain to use western Palin to appeal to those states such Nevada, Oregon, and Washington (she and her husband are dyed-in-the-wool Seattle Seahawk fans). Add in her midwestern-type of twang, and you will see a lot of Sarah in the midwest in these last few weeks.

Keep in mind what I have been saying for months now. Watch where the candidates go...this will tell you what their internal polling is showing. Also remember that Obama still has the tougher challenge: he must turn some "red" states "blue. But he must do that while holding all his blue states. It does him no good to pick off New Mexico, Colorado or Iowa if McCain captures Michigan or Pennsylvania.

Finally, Obama has to also watch his back. Hillary must appear to help him while hoping he goes down to ignominious defeat so that she can be the "I told you so" candidate in 2012. Her problem is she better watch what she wishes for as a Vice-President Palin may steal much of her appeal should a President McCain choose to only serve one term and retire at 76.

And while he has his eye on the ball, he must survive second-guessing by his party. Now polls are showing huge movements in the public at large towards the Republicans that could change the make-up of the Congress. Only 33 seats in the 100 seat Senate and even a worse-case scenario makes it likely that the Democrats should at least enlarge their slim majority in that body by a few seats. But all 435 seats come up for grabs every two years in the House of Representatives. Most of the seats that the Democrats won to retake control in 2006 were won by slight 53-47 type margins. If the public, which has given this Congress record-low approval ratings, decides to put the Republicans back in control, Nancy Pelosi's short-lived reign as Speaker of the House will come to an end. Keep your eye on whether the Democrats give in on the congressional ban on off-shore drilling. Polls continue to show that off-shore drilling remains a popular strategy with a wide-range of voters.

All in all, it continues to be one of the most fascinating election campaigns in US history...and when you consider that we started with a knockdown drag out in 1796 between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, that's saying quite a lot!

A late edit...I am working on a response to Whoopi Goldberg's widely covered comment during McCain's visit to The View yesterday about whether she should be concerned about "should I be concerned about being a slave again" to McCain's views about appointing Supreme Court justices who would simply interpret the Constitution as written by the Framers and not try to write laws from the bench. Look for that post on my other blog "Lincoln's Ghost" by clicking at the link on the sidebar. Thanks.