Torture Light

Frost: So what in a sense, you're saying is that there are
certain situations . . . where the president can decide that it's in the
best interests of the nation or something, and do something illegal.

Nixon: Well, when the president does it
that means that it is not illegal.

Frost: By definition.

Nixon: Exactly. Exactly. If the president, for example,

approves something because of the national security,
or in this case because of a threat to internal peace
and order of significant magnitude, then the president's decision
in that instance is one that enables those who carry it out,
to carry it out without violating a law.

David Frost/Nixon interview, (05/19/1977)
_________

David Frost was a wicked boy.

A recent Op-Ed piece in The Wall Street Journal called on Americans to "stop their moral posturing" vis-a-vis torture. We weren't aware that such high-handedness existed in this administration (Getting Serious About 'Torture', WSJ, 10/22/07.)

Before tuning out seeing as this speaks to a WSJ piece, consider their large audience, and that you are reading their most eloquent defenders. Then consider perhaps the most remarkable part of the piece -- its authorship.

Quoth the Journal, "Messrs. Rivkin and Casey served in the Justice Department under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, and were members of the U.N. Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights from 2004-2006." Casting central for the Twilight Zone could not have chosen the authors better.

The legal somersaults involved are impressive. Consider the following:

"(D)efining torture raises complex legal, policy and moral issues, and cannot be done without taking into account all of the facts and circumstances surrounding the use of any particular interrogation technique."

So, sometimes it's torture, but sometimes not. They seem to feel that jurists should subscribe to the wobbly soft discipline's ideas on situational ethics. If it's torture for good (i.e., for us), that's o.k. But that squidginess contradicts the very purpose of having rule of law.

Interrogation techniques can not, and should not, even be mixed into a sentence with the word torture. If an action is considered torture if done to an American, then it is torture when done by or for Americans.

The authors seek to muddy the waters by claiming U.S. military terrorism resistance training subjects soldiers to behavior commensurate with torture, but this is a bald-faced lie.

Nothing in training, even SERE, approaches real torture, as everybody knows the trainers cannot go beyond a certain point. Actual torture sessions are well beyond the borders of normal fears. Most torturers seek to partially destroy the subject before they ask the first question.

Torture and interrogation are not interchangeable concepts. An interrogation elicits information that will be processed into intelligence. The reliability of the source is a function of the intelligence production cycle. Torture does not produce intel; it produces fantasy. Then again, since the Phony War on Terror is fantasy, statements so gathered probably pass for reality-based intelligence these days.

"(F)orcing a prisoner to maintain an uncomfortable posture for a period of time is not cruel, inhuman or degrading, although forcing him to do so while naked, shackled to the floor in near freezing temperatures might be. It is a matter of degree."

Indeed. 34 degrees might be acceptable; 32 is beyond the pale.

"The law defines torture as the intentional infliction of "severe pain or suffering." But, if it's not intentional. . . Echoes of John Cleese: "Sorry, sooo sorry -- just an accident; we can fix that."

To even utter the term "might be" following that description is indicative of moral and legal bankruptcy. If these are the chimes of freedom, don't play them in my neighborhood.

The purpose of torture is not to gain information, but to dominate, humiliate and suppress any humanity left in the prisoner. If we even consider acts which could be considered torture, then we have negated the stated reasons for fighting Nazi Germany, the Japanese empire and Communism, and the very justification for the Iraq escapade.

"(V)arying degrees of coercion are present in many public institutions, including penitentiaries, boot camps for juvenile and adult offenders, police training academies and many aspects of military life. . . All of this suggests that, at a minimum, stressful interrogations consistent with the U.S. military's basic training should be permissible as a matter of course, with other methods to be considered on a case-by-case basis."

According to our standards of jurisprudence, there is no "case-by-case basis." Laws are written to obviate loose interpretations and applications based upon individual legal interpretations. There is no relativity when it comes to the application of torture techniques. Flatly, they are illegal, immoral and not deserving of American interests.

In those cases mentioned, the coercion is not torture, and is court-ordered and possesses a legitimate social function. The people held as terrorist detainees have not had their day in court before they face their front-loaded punishment. America still adheres to the maxim, "Innocent until proven guilty" -- or does it?

The piece ends with the predictable clap-trap about torture saving lives:

"Americans rightfully expect to be protected from attack. But there is no free lunch. Coercive interrogations have been key in preventing post -9/11 attacks on American soil. To preempt future attacks the intelligence agencies must continue to have information that can often be obtained only from captured terrorists.

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc. That is the most weasely offense (with no offense to actual weasels) committed by these authors, as with most of the designers of and apologists for the Iraq escapade.

Hasn't anyone taken sophomore logic here?

--Jim and Lisa

The Revolution Will Not be Televised

There will be no highlights on the eleven o'clock news
and no pictures of hairy armed women
liberationists and Jackie Onassis blowing her nose.
The theme song will not be written by Jim Webb,
Francis Scott Key, nor sung by Glen Campbell, Tom
Jones, Johnny Cash, Englebert Humperdink, or the Rare Earth.
The revolution will not be televised.
--The Revolution Will Not be Televised, Gil Scott-Heron

___________

Never underestimate the power of protest.

One of our local professors has coauthored a recently released book titled, Books on Trial; Red Scare in the Heartland. It is the story of the arrest and subsequent release of book store owners and Communist party members Bob and Ina Wood in 1940 Oklahoma City.

"While prosecutors claimed that Wood and his cohorts advocated violence, destruction of property and murder, they proved only that he consorted with African Americans and Jews and sold books.

"Protests from 'thousands (if not tens of thousands) of private citizens poured into the offices of the county attorney, the state attorney general, and the governor.' Newspapers across the country editorialized in favor of free speech, free assembly and fundamental civil rights. Finally, in 1943 the Criminal Court of Appeals reversed the district court’s opinion.

"The Wiegands note the parallels between the 'paranoid politics' of that day and the present 'chain of civil liberties violations.' Even with the world at war, when the civil rights of a few citizens were threatened, people across the nation got it—their rights, too, stood in harm's way (Paranoia in Power, review in FSU Research in Review.) "

An animated number citizens was able to secure the release of improperly incarcerated citizens, by voicing their dissent.

It is reminiscent of the lessons from another protest, during an even more repressive regime.

Another FSU professor, Dr. Nathan Stoltzfus, wrote on the Rosenstrasse incident. If you are unfamiliar with it, the link will bring you to a thorough review of the book. It begins:

"Day and night for a week in early 1943, hundreds of unarmed German women did something that was unheard of in Nazi Germany.

"They stood toe-to-toe with machine gun-wielding Gestapo agents and demanded the release of their Jewish husbands from Adolph Hitler’s murderous grip. The men were locked up in the Jewish community center in the heart of Berlin, victims of Hitler’s final roundup of German Jews.

"The women's courage and passion prevailed: As thousands of other Berlin Jews were crammed into cattle cars and transported to Auschwitz, the Jews married to 'Aryan' German women were set free.

"But even today, more than 50 years after the Nazi reign of terror, few Germans acknowledge the significance of protest on Rosenstrasse, the street where the dramatic showdown took place. To admit that unarmed women saved 1,700 Jews from deportation would be to challenge postwar Germany's consensus that ordinary citizens were powerless to curb Hitler's anti-Semitic rampage (The Day Hitler Blinked.)"

The revolution will not be televised.

--Lisa

A Bee in Our Bonnet

If all the beasts were gone, men would die from
great loneliness of spirit, for whatever happens to the beasts
also happens to man. All things are connected.
Whatever befalls the earth befalls the sons of the earth
--Chief Seattle (1854)

Ranger Scatological Thought For the Day:
America is caught between a blow job, a hand job, toilet stalls
and kitty litter boxes called Iraq and Afghanistan
__________

Yesterday Ranger watched a documentary on Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), causing him to reflect on the larger world that the honeybees inhabit, and its respective collapse.

Honeybees are dying off at an alarming rate. The bees fly from their hives, never to return. One theory is that several factors are affecting their ability to find pollen, resulting in the disastrous cascade leading to the hive's death. The bee colonies are collapsing, with grave implications beyond the hive's honey production.

This led to some free-range thinking away from the hive. Ranger hopes he'll find his way home.

The U.S. is experiencing its own CCD (Country Collapse Disorder), as the things essential to our hive health are being ignored. We are handed a $2.4 trillion dollar war addressing the chimerical fears of domestic terrorism, when Dear Leader promised Social Security reform. Well, that reforms things right quick, as in erasing creative or generous (I realize, not a term often linked with neo-cons vis-a-vis social programs) options.

In our neck of the woods, the republicans still blame Bill Clinton for being asleep on the watch and allowing Osama bin laden and al-Qaeda to fester into a problem necessitating such an extravagant reaction.

Of course, the facts are more nuanced, as they usually are, and Clinton was well-aware of the threat posed by bin-Laden. But the hypocritical republicans took his attention away from addressing the country's welfare in favor of self-defense over a blow job. You understand this, but there are still a lot of folks who don't.

We know the litany of problems America now confronts: environmental and infrastructure blights, the falling value of the dollar, the job exodus, the dismal housing market. In view of all that faces the average hive-dweller, Iraq and Afghanistan seem distant concerns for the average American taxpayer.

The very real problems facing America are sublimated for a hand-job called the Phony War on Terror (PWOT©). Yeah, GWB is tough on terror, but he's hell on the American public, which is getting jerked off on a daily basis. Perhaps he himself is one of the axes of evil (or as my 10th grade biology teacher/football coach Rudy Rolle might've said, one of the "asses" of evil. Lisa remembers this from his discussion of the earth's rotation on its asses.)

Awful as the republican side is, the democrats offer little hope for substantive change. They've been promising universal health care for as long as Ranger can remember ( a long time). They claim to represent the average Joe, but do they ever deliver? These days, they too only run patrician oligarchs on their tickets.

Where are we? The war has drained the honey from the hive. Iraq may prosper, but America will not do so on any meaningful level for many years to come. The democrats will not deliver a candidate who will unequivocally end this meaningless PWOT.

Both parties are focusing on the welfare of Iraqis, while their own hive is collapsing. Once the worker bees are lost, the queen cannot live.

--Jim and Lisa

Ring of Fire

(Michael) ...Suffering, redemption, and decay!
(Angels) It's a bitch.
--Wishing Window, Leonard Cohen
_________

A well-meaning conservative friend has just sent a series of pictures on the California wildfires under the caption, "Please Pray" (Godtube; it's not all about you.) They are dramatic, and show beautiful homes that look like small Hyatt Regencies going up in flames.

Most of those folks hot-tailed it our in their Hummers, and I found the most affecting photo to be one of two deer in the middle of a round surrounded by flames. The caption reads:

"Pray for all the people that have lost their homes.
Pray these fires die down soon.
Pray for the firefighters and their safety.
Please keep them safe.

"Please keep their homes, pets, and families safe.
Please convince people that no house is worth their lives,
and that they need to evacuate when asked.
Please keep people off their cell phones
so the firefighters can use the lines.
God, please let them all be okay.

[Well, at least that. Thank God they didn't have to worry about everyone having cell phones during Katrina. If any calls could have been made out, that is.]

But you know, it is not okay.

It is not okay to build such elaborate dwelling in such environmentally sensitive areas.

It is not okay to pray for the safety of such beautiful homes and beautiful people, while ignoring far more dire situations in which a much greater number of people suffer loss on a daily basis.

I received no such requests for prayer vigils after Hurricane Katrina, a debacle from which thousands are still suffering. But a shotgun shack under water doesn't seem to elicit the same pangs of sympathy from the prayer circle folk.

Everyone wants to be the people who are reaping the wind in California. Not that they want to suffer fire, but they want to have that castle in the hills. They can imagine themselves the brother of such a privileged one. Who wants to twin with the single mother of three on public assistance?

As one caller defiantly stated on an NPR call-in program Friday, "The California residents left when they were told," unlike those who abided in the wake of Katrina. The implication was clear: defiant or slovenly people are not treated to the same level of response.

How nice it is to have your own conveyance, and not be at the mercy of public transportation, and to have someplace to go, or the money with which to secure accommodations elsewhere. And the insurance with which to rebuild.

--Lisa

An "A" for Honesty

Just one look at you
And I know it's gonna be
A lovely day.....
--Lovely Day, Bill Withers
_________

From last weekend's Wall Street Journal (10-20/21/07), wisdom, from the mouth of Peggy Noonan (Sex and the Presidency.)

In a column on Hillary Clinton, she mentions the unfortunate fact that women are still patronized by men in some corners. But in a stroke for her demure readers, she says "(c)onservative women tend not to talk about it." Several paragraphs earlier she mentions the ladylike Jackie Kennedy, and we can assume that, although Jackie happened to be a Democrat, Noonan is imputing the same refinement to her conservative ladies.

Now for the truth.

"They [conservative women] don't go public with their complaints because they're afraid it will encourage liberals to pass a law, and if you wanted more laws, or thought laws could reform human nature and make us all nice, you wouldn't be a conservative."

They know better. Truer words were never spake.

--Lisa

A Few Smart Bad Apples?

Lt. Col. Marshall Gutierrez (deceased)

The Army Times reports today on audits scheduled to begin next week into possible contract fraud at Camp Arifjan, a large logistics and staging facility, in Kuwait. A previous audit describes Kuwait as "an environment ripe for misconduct and malfeasance" (Army Reviews Iraq Contracts for Fraud.)

Next week,

"This team of 10 auditors, criminal investigators and acquisition experts are starting with a sampling of the roughly 6,000 contracts worth $2.8 billion issued by an Army office in Kuwait that service officials have identified as a hub of corruption.

"The office, located at Camp Arifjan, buys gear and supplies to support U.S. troops as they move in and out of Iraq. The pace of that operation has exploded since the beginning of the Iraq war in March 2003."

This comes in the wake of the recent suspicious death of Lt. Colonel Marshall Gutierrez at Camp Arifjan, a whistleblower who accused Kuwait-based Public Warehousing of rampant overcharging. In what sounds like a set up job, Gutierrez was then charged with extortion of $3,500 by Public Warehousing, ending up in confinement at Camp Victory in Kuwait awaiting a court martial, and then, dead (The Wall Street Journal featured the story 10-21/22/07, "Inside the Greed Zone.")

Publicly traded Public Warehousing is one of the largest transport companies in the world, according to the Journal, and with more than $6 billion in U.S. contracts, "is designated a prime vendor for virtually all food served to U.S. forces in Iraq and Kuwait."

"Investigators suspect the military wound up paying inflated prices for everything from preserved milk to lobster tails. . ." Are soldiers eating lobster tails?

The Journal article mentions a "party house" run by one Saudi catering company, Tamimi Global, where bribes reportedly occur. We wonder if there is linkage to the bin Laden family. If there were, it would point up what a pathetic board game this entire Iraq venture is.

By way of explanation, The Army Times article says, "(s)igns of trouble include contracts continually awarded to vendors without the usual competition and awards that were competed but went to the bidder with the highest price rather than the lowest. A mismatch between the original product to be purchased and what was actually delivered is another red flag."

Cui bono?

--Lisa

Blackout

Well, we're doin' mighty fine, I do suppose,
In our streak of lightnin' cars and fancy clothes,
But just so we're reminded of the ones who are held back,
Up front there ought 'a be a Man In Black
--Man in Black, Johnny Cash
_________

A thought:

In today's military, which has a sizable ethnic representation, why have the last five Medals of Honor been awarded to white men? Of all of the Silver Stars and Distinguished Service Crosses/Navy Crosses that Ranger has seen publicized, all were awarded to white servicemen.

Further, when was the last time you saw a black Brigade Commander or black General Officer?

Have you seen photos of any black Blackwater operatives? Could they be discriminatory in their hiring practices? Then again, that is seriously doubtful, as they are there to protect American values.

Gimme a Break

Today is not the time for truth-telling

Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.) was censured by his fellows this week and forced into a teary apology for a controversial remark he made about soldiers in Iraq getting "their heads blown off for the president's amusement

The Washington Post called the statement made last week during debate to override the president's veto of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, "a gaffe." But a gaffe is a mistake, and this was an accusatory, intentional statement.

"You don't have money to fund the war or children, but you're going to spend it to blow up innocent people, if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the President's amusement."

The Post went on to explain that "House Democrats were furious with Stark for taking them off message on the SCHIP bill." That may be, but Speaker Nancy Pelosi was out of line calling his remarks "inappropriate."

They chided Stark, 75, for "putting his foot in his mouth for years," but you only need to hit one home run.

--Lisa

Arm-Twisting

"Oh, it's been a long journey from Milan to Minsk, Rochelle, Rochelle!"
--Bette Middler song from fictional musical Rochelle, Rochelle,
featured in Seinfeld

_________

The fictional character Rochelle's voyage seems no less absurd than deputy assistant secretary of defense for coalition affairs Debra Cagan's junket "from Tirana to Skopje, and on to Chisinau and Astana, among other luminous world metropolises," in order to drum up a few more coalition participants.

As The Times recently reported,

"In Chisinau - you guessed it; that's the capital of Moldova - Cagan asked for more sappers in Iraq. Moldova currently has 11 bomb-disposal experts there. Yes, 11.

"In downtown Tirana, hub of a 20th century exercise in communist folly and now a place in need of American money, Cagan pressed the Albanians to go beyond their 120-strong contingent in Iraq. Albania is considering another 125 to 150 troops.

"As for Cagan's stops in the Macedonian capital of Skopje and Kazakhstan's Astana, it's unclear what transpired. Macedonia has 40 troops in Iraq; the Kazakhs have 27 military engineers. Other states visited included Ukraine, which may offer a little help in Iraq, and the Czech Republic, which got promises of military equipment."

"The 168,000 U.S. troops already account for about 94 percent of the forces there. The largest other contributor, Britain, is to halve its presence to 2,500 next year."

"Against this fraying backdrop, the strange idea of Pentagon brass spending two weeks hop-scotching a continent to cajole countries - many economically hard-pressed - into sending a platoon or two looks less outlandish. That's where we are seven years into the Bush administration: stretched to the limit."

Not only stretched to the limit, but lacking convincing justification for staying. If the U.S. can get more bodies to hop on, it is the argument from mass: "We can't let down such a convicted juggernaut, can we, now."

It is the same as the fallacious argument from loss: "So many good soldiers have died; we can't let that be in vain." So, we have to let more keep dying, to somehow vindicate the previous deaths, which vindicate the previous. . . It becomes a house of mirrors. A funhouse, which isn't very fun.

"The United States is as isolated in Iraq as a great power can be. A first term spent riding roughshod over friends and vaunting 'coalitions of the willing' over alliances has not been righted by a second term of diplomacy rehabilitation. Wounds linger."

As absurd as this project to prop up the facade of coalition is, the article fails to address the main problem with this diplomacy of desperation, namely: Why is the Department of Defense (DoD) conducting negotiations that should fall under the purview of the Department of State (DoS)? Negotiations between governments is a State function.

The U.S. -- if it is to remain the U.S. --needs to keep its agencies operating within their charters.

The DoD is not lead agency in the U.S. government in effecting diplomatic relationships and enlisting coalition partners. This is a further denigration the DoS, the diminution of which has been a hallmark of the administration.

America is not a military nation. The military is but one function of the government, and it does not determine policy when dealing with other nations.

The article concludes: "A U.S. administration casting around for soldiering scraps in Moldova and Macedonia should be careful about saber-rattling toward Iran." Not a bad caveat.

A Fungus Amongus

What if your brain,
Unexpectedly and suddenly,
Picked out things to flip around
And view a lot differently?
--Take Me to Your Leader, Incubus
__________

A Public Service Announcement: A friend and fellow blogroll member labrys at Walk of the Fallen has alerted us to a discovery which may help remedy a longstanding health woe of her husband's -- a skin problem which he picked up in Vietnam.

He, as well as Ranger and probably many other Vietnam servicemen, has suffered rashes of unknown etiology for 35 years. Recently, a doctor diagnosed a fungal infection, and he is responding well to oral Lamisil. One must be monitored for liver enzyme function while on the medication, but if it cures, it's worth a go.

Pass it along if you know someone who might benefit.

FWIW: Jim treats his fungal outbreaks with topical Nizoral and shampoo (ketoconazole, generic). It doesn't cure it, but it attenuates the outbreaks. He was fortunate some 15 years on to be diagnosed correctly by a retired Air Force physician in private practice. [The Army doctors never bothered to run a culture, and just told him to scrub better, which only irritated the matter.] The VA system can dispense Nizoral.

Deflowered

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves
--William Pitt

If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy
-- James Madison
__________

This ran in our local paper today, but extrapolate the subtext to your neck o' the woods.

Front page, local section: "The Latest War on Terror Victim: Beauty." Nope, not a soliloquy on the beautiful young people dying in the Phony War on Terror (PWOT©), but rather, an homage to the soon gone big old oaks in front of the Old Capitol Building, which is actually now a museum standing in front of the New Capitol, where business is conducted. The trees will be felled in favor of "concrete security bollards to be erected across the front of the building" by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE).

Now, it is prudent and correct to take proactive and/or reactive terrorism counteraction. That is, if there is a credible threat based upon reliable intelligence. Absent reliable evidence that the state capital is actually targeted by a group with a potential to execute a credible attack, these plans are foolhardy.

It is absurd to cut down trees to counter a threat that does not exist. Since the PWOT is an absurdity, I guess it is logical to cut down 200 year old oak trees; somehow, it smacks of tilting at windmills. If there is a threat, a spike barrier would be sufficient, and would not be obtrusive.

Realistically, what group could possibly have access to vehicular bombs in Florida?

Taking this to its logical endpoint, why not bring the 124th Infantry of the Florida National Guard into active duty and emplace them in bunkers around the capital complex amongst the azaleas? God knows they have enough experience doing this in Baghdad. Good for Iraq; better for Tallahassee.

In a nod to the green members of society, we could use the logs dismembered from the felled trees to provide overhead cover. The best of greencycling.

Alternately, we could arm the antiwar protesters who march in front of the capitol, as most of them have military experience, with RPGs to neutralize any approaching car bombs. A Private 1st Class could supervise them. Hell, I'll join the group if they give me an RPG, with at least three rounds.

Terrorism counteraction policy must be based in fact, rather than knee-jerk reactions. Realistic threat analysis is the key to all effective action.

What's really going on? The Old Capitol fronts the major thoroughfare through town. So every day, commuters will no longer see the homey domed capitol behind Spanish moss-covered oaks, but rather, "tacky as can be" security bollards," that according to local arborist Sam Hand, PhD.

As with the constant barrage from the media and entertainment outlets, the purpose seems to be to keep the citizens in a continual state of free-floating anxiety. As fear has become the watchword, it somehow makes what the U.S. is doing in the Middle East relevant. We are keeping them occupied with fresh meat over there, so they cannot hop the bollards over here.

The bollards are window dressing and backdrop for the six-o'clock news show.

Ambushes

In a barroom the TV is flashing like a fire,
and warning of the future like a prophet from the past,
the radio is blaring like a siren in the corner,
and telling you to prepare for an all out attack,
the newspaper reads like a page from the bible
and tells us a tale of impending doom,
but blind, deaf and dumb are we
and all we really care about is who can drink the most
before he goes to the bathroom
--Blindsided, The Systematics
__________

It must be the cycle of the moon, but for some reason Ranger cannot flush the obtrusive thoughts of ambushes out of mind.

The present kill ratio is +/- 19,000:3,750. This is an unacceptable figure, indicating U.S. forces are getting killed at an unacceptable rate in spite of upgraded vehicle aand body armor, training and combined arms tactics.

So why the casualty rate? It must be due to ambushes. The IED employments are obviously explosive ambushes, and are deadly killers. Ambushes can be near or far infantry-type ambushes, and further, hasty or prepared. All are deadly if properly employed by the adversary. And obviously, they are being properly employed.

Generally the prepared ambush should be the most deadly and difficult to counter. The main body of the ambush force will create a deadly kill zone. They will have near and far security to seal off the kill zone and to delay reaction forces until the main body leaves the zone of action and returns to their objective rally point.

But the point is the kill zone will be beaten by small arms fire and possibly covered by explosives, and definitely RPG fire. So U.S. forces are always fighting against the odds. The fear factor favors the ambushes and possibly this is why the kill ratio is jacked up.

The U.S. is facing planned ambushes on a frequent basis. They can plan and distribute their fire in the most efficient manner, and can command and control their elements for maximum effect. In other words, they are operating right out of the Ranger Handbook.

If Ranger were an urban guerrilla, then far ambushes planned in advance would be the order of the day, with kill zones in depth. There is nothing secret here.

Only the answer to why the U.S. is electing to sustain these expected and brutal attacks on a daily basis.

A Soldier's Creed

The U.S. Army has posted their latest "Soldier's Creed" on their site, superimposed over the phrase "Warrior Ethos." The page is headed: "The Way Ahead: Our Army at War. Relevant and Ready."

Ranger offers the RAW version:


I am an American soldier.

I represent the citizens of America and myself am a proud citizen.

I serve and protect the Constitution and the citizens of the United States.

I am a professional, and will obey all legal directives of the chain of command.

I am not a warrior -- I am the might and power of America. War is not a creed.

I will not participate in wars of aggression.

I will adhere to the Geneva Conventions.

I will uphold the values of America.

I am an American fighting man.


Comments and additions welcome. We're open to revisions.

Homeland Security

Ripley: These people are here to protect you. They're soldiers.
Newt: It won't make any difference.

Frost: It's hot as hell in here.
Hudson: Yeah man, but it's a dry heat!
--Aliens (1986)
________

A little trip down memory lane:

On 2 Mar 71, Ranger was a young captain and redeployed back to CONUS from RVN. This was the Nixon good-faith move that the U.S. was drawing down the war by taking the vaunted 5th Special Forces Group Airborne out of the equation.

The rub, however, was that only 53 of us brought the colors back home to good old Ft. Bragg. On 2 Mar 71 everybody wearing the Green Beret in RVN merely changed their headgear and became an element of USArmy VN -- USARV. Nice sham.

The SF left RVN, yet all the men remained behind, left in contact with the NVA/VC. Well, it played well in Peoria.

So here we are, 17 Oct 07, and the Army is making much out of drawing down a single combat Brigade. Ranger wonders if all the personnel will make it back to home station, or will they simply be absorbed by other formations? Just something to consider.

In "Military Sets Iraq Drawdown," the following quote reveals a disconnect in CI logic as practiced by today's Army:

The shift in Diyala in December could be a model for follow-on reductions next year, with a redrawing of the U.S. lines of responsibility so that a departing brigade has its battle space consumed by a remaining brigade. At the same time, Iraqi security forces would assume greater responsibility.

The Army obviously and understandably considers its occupied space as battle space. . . but, what else? Of course, where else would warriors hang out? Yet miraculously, when our warriors vacate this battle space, somehow it seems to morph magically into something Iraqi security forces can handle. Poof!

Wouldn't it be more instructive to consider this battle space (pardon Ranger, but the term battle space really cranks up my amps) the country of Iraq, or the city of Baghdad, or "their homeland"? Iraqis live, breathe and occupy these battle spaces. These are their homes and neighborhoods.

U.S. troops would best serve the Iraqis by giving them back their own backyards.

They have had more than enough of U.S. battle space.

Bait and Switch

Nobody can acquire honor by doing what is wrong
--Thomas Jefferson

______

U.S. Army snipers have a proud tradition of serving in combat arenas that are harsh and deadly. They live by the motto, "One shot, one kill."

The tradition goes back to the Pennsylvania and Kentucky rifles employed in the American Revolution and later, the War of 1812. Rifle marksmanship in the Battle of New Orleans and the Mexican War assisted U.S. commanders execute their war plans, and in the Civil War, Berdan's Sharpshooters were the direct forefathers of today's snipers.

A proud tradition in a once-proud Army. But recent actions approved by the Army chain of command regarding the employment of snipers in Iraq are deplorable, and fall under the category of war crimes.

Specifically, the baiting program developed by the Department of Defense Assymetrical Warfare Group at Ft. Meade, which advocates enticing potential targets by leaving bits of explosives or detonation cord in open view. The presumption is that only -- terrorists (?), combatants (?), hooligans (?) --would be interested in picking up such ephemera.

In addition to the baiting program, the group devised the concept of kill teams -- groups from the Third Brigade, Second Infantry Division, who would "dig holes resembling those used by insurgents to hide roadside bombs, and to shoot Iraqis who tried to place things in the holes." The kill teams ostensibly were more benevolent than their name implied as they "used the tactic not to kill people, but to wound them with gunshots and then capture and interrogate them" (Snipers Baited and Killed Iraqis, Soldiers Testify.)

Somehow, kill teams do not sound like democracy in action. "Death and democracy" lacks the ring of "hearts and minds," but I guess it suits the new action Army.

So hundreds of years of rifle work have brought us to the 1st Battalion, 501st Infantry, 25th Infantry Division. In conjunction with commander's guidance, these jack-offs shoot and kill and then place "drop" items to designate their kill a legal score.

This makes a mockery of America's claim to be spreading freedom and dignity.

Questions remained unanswered regarding the case of Spec. 4 Jorge Sandoval, who was recently acquitted for shooting and killing an unarmed man upon orders of his team leader:

Assuming the victim was in fact an insurgent without a weapon, did the team attempt to capture him before engaging? If intelligence is the key to defeating a counterinsurgency, wouldn't that be the smartest, most military course of action to take?

A live prisoner is the most valuable combat intelligence asset available to the battlefield commander. It is incredibly stupid to shoot possible sources of combat intelligence, especially if the suspect can be detained via another method.

In addition to Sandoval, two other soldiers, Staff Sgt. Michael A. Hensley, the sniper team squad leader, and Sgt. Evan Vela, face premeditated murder charges. Sgt. Vela shot an unarmed man who stumbled upon their position, and had thrust his arms in the air in surrender.

"None of the soldiers deny that they killed the three Iraqis they are charged with murdering. . . . the soldiers say the killings were legal and authorized by their superiors." (Snipers Baited and Killed Iraqis.)

"A military panel acquitted U.S. Army Spc. Jorge G. Sandoval of two counts of murder Friday, apparently swayed by testimony from fellow Army snipers that two Iraqi men were killed on orders from a higher ranking soldier" (Army Sniper acquitted of murder in Iraq.)

"After the killing, Flores said Staff Sgt. Michael Hensley told him (Flores) to place the detonation wire on the body and in the man's pocket, which he said he did."

"In the May shooting, Sgt. Evan Vela said Hensley told him to shoot a man who had stumbled upon their snipers' hideout, although he was not armed and had his hands in the air when he approached the soldiers."

It seems that the old Nuremberg axiom -- "I was only following orders" -- is back in vogue, and legal justification for shooting unarmed and surrendered personnel.

In WW II, that wasn't good enough to extricate yourself from culpability in a war crime. Apparently in the Phony War on Terror, the "following orders" defense is a legal excuse for violating the Geneva Conventions and U.S. law. What happened to duty, honor, country?

What a crock.

Tortured Justice

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather
a scornful tone,"it means just what I choose it to mean
--neither more nor less."
--Through the Looking Glass, Lewis Carroll
__________

During GWB's press conference yesterday, Newsweek's Richard Wolffe asked Bush "a simple question" -- "What's your definition of the word torture?

Bush hedged, saying "That's defined in U.S. law, and we don't torture."

Wolffe persisted, "Can you give me your version of it, sir?

"Bush: No. Whatever the law says.

Dan Froomkin in the Washington Post reads it this way: "Bush has consistently refused to say what he means when he says 'we don't torture,' rendering the phrase essentially meaningless. Saying 'whatever the law says' doesn't clear things up at all. It just means that if we do it, his lawyers have found a way not to call it torture (Torture Watch.)

It has been just over a week since the Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal filed on behalf of Khaled el-Masri, a German citizen who claims he was abducted and tortured by United States agents while imprisoned in Afghanistan (Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Torture Appeal.)

"Without comment, the justices let stand an appeals court ruling that the state secrets privilege, a judicially created doctrine that the Bush administration has invoked to win dismissal of lawsuits that touch on issues of national security, protected the government’s actions from court review. In refusing to take up the case, the justices declined a chance to elaborate on the privilege for the first time in more than 50 years."

El-Masri says he was "detained while on vacation in Macedonia in late 2003, transported by the United States to Afghanistan and tortured while held there for five months in a secret prison before being taken to Albania and set free, evidently having been mistaken for a terrorism suspect with a similar name." We're so sorry, Uncle Albert.

A German court issued arrest warrants 1/13/07 for 13 CIA agents, and the episode has become a public example of the United States government’s program of "extraordinary rendition." Kidnapping and rendition conducted by intelligence agents paid for by your taxes.

"In their Supreme Court appeal, Mr. Masri’s lawyers argued that previous rulings allowed the state secrets doctrine to become 'unmoored' from its origins as a rule to be invoked to shield specific evidence in a lawsuit against the government, rather than to dismiss an entire case before any evidence was produced."

So, all the government need do is invoke state's secrets, and you have lost the right to sue in federal court.

Where is the system of checks and balances envisioned in the American experiment called democracy? When state's secrets trump the rights of individuals, then Ranger reckons there is no longer a concept of individual rights that will protect persons from government corruption and malfeasance -- including torture, kidnapping and extraordinary renditions.

And please don't say Mr. el-Masri was not a U.S. citizen. The rights of all persons should be respected in a U.S. court of law. In effect, the court has effectively removed the judicial branch from the equation that provides for checks and balances on our government and protects our way of life. Two legs do not keep a table standing.

The balance of the scales of justice demands the participation of the judiciary. Remember the blindfold? There are no ear plugs.

The Sandbox and The Litterbox

Two unrelated items today from the Washington Post struck a personal note

First, Doonesbury cartoonist Garry Trudeau, who started a milblog (the Sandbox) to help get the troops blogging overseas more stateside exposure, released a collection by the same name today (War Dispatches to Doonesbury.) I haven't seen it yet, but it should read like a good epistolary novel, except it's true.

I have had the pleasure of corresponding with one or two of the soldier contributors, and if you haven't already done so, you might find the book or the site of interest. Slate online magazine also carries the Sandbox feature.

Second, disturbing studies of new drug-resistant strains of the Staph bacteria, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), were published today (Drug-Resistant Staph Germ's Toll Is Higher Than Thought.) Statistics show that MRSA kills more people annually in the U.S. than H.I.V-AIDS, Parkinson's disease, emphesema or homocide.

Coincident with the news, a friend was diagnosed and sent to a nearby VA hospital with MRSA, to spend several days on an antibiotic IV drip. These bacteria are resistant to traditional "first-line" antibiotics, and can only be treated with vancomycin, the current antibiotic of last resort.

"'This is a significant public health problem. We should be very worried,' said Scott K. Fridkin, a medical epidemiologist at the CDC.

"It's really just the tip of the iceberg," said Elizabeth A. Bancroft, a medical epidemiologist at the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health who wrote an editorial in JAMA accompanying the new studies. "It is astounding."

"MRSA, which is spread by casual contact, rapidly turns minor abscesses and other skin infections into serious health problems, including painful, disfiguring "necrotizing" abscesses that eat away tissue."

Drug companies have not been swift to develop new antibiotics because the financial incentive is not there.

Another bacterium (Streptococcus pneumoniae) has also become drug-resistant, and researchers "attributed its resistance to a combination of the overuse of antibiotics and the introduction of a vaccine that protects against (ear) infection."

My friend had just finished spending several weeks in the waters off of our coast, waters with a high human fecal content, sadly. I won't be testing the waters anytime soon.

--Lisa

He's No Richard Gere

A Teaching moment from the Master:
"So he said, 'I'll Huff and I'll puff and I'll blow your house down.'
But the third little piggy said, 'Not by the hair of my chinny chin chin."
__________

I am a little confused. The Washington Post reports GWB met privately with the Dalai Lama today, "despite China's warning that U.S. plans to honor the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader could damage relations between Beijing and Washington" (Bush Hosts Dalai Lama Amid Chinese Rage.) Wednesday,

"Bush will attend the ceremony [to award the Congressional Gold Medal] on Capitol Hill, the first time a U.S. president will appear in public with the Dalai Lama, spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhists. . . whom China regards as a separatist and a traitor."

Mixing her metaphors, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said, "We in no way want to stir the pot and make China feel that we are poking a stick in their eye -- to a country that we have ... a good relationship with on a variety of issues." Uh, yeah -- to call a spade a spade, a country floating our economy at the moment.

So why is GWB playing Richard Gere? Why is Laura Bush championing the Free Burma campaign? Why, almost a century after the fact, is Congress pushing for a resolution to recognize the Armenian massacre, guaranteed to cause strife with one of our few (usually) reliable friends, Turkey -- a country which is necessary to help supply the Iraq war effort?

Some or all of these moves seem designed to be either a distraction from, or an irritant fomenting further world strife in a run-up to our next war (with Iran).

At the outset of our hostilities with Iraq, GWB appeared to be a bumbler, and alternately, a venal capitalist looking out for his oil buddies. Now, I am not so sure. I have seen the zeal with which some Christians approach their proselytizing. They are afraid to enter some of their new missionary stomping grounds, like Afghanistan, but still, they go.

Do not scoff: For the true believer, the Rapture is prophesied. Armageddon and Elysian Fields await. Jewish people must control Jerusalem in order for this to come down as they envision it. Sometimes I wonder how deeply the fundamentalist mindset has permeated this administration.

--Lisa

He Must've Been Absent That Day. . .

Bush: We Don't Torture!

Surprise, surprise: British think-tank the Oxford Research Group [ORG] says "the war on terror is failing and instead fueling an increase in support for extremist Islamist movements." They suggest a "re-think" is called for, probably over a nice pot of tea (Report Says War on Terror is Fueling al Qaeda.)

Study author Paul Rogers described the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq as a "'disastrous mistake' which had helped establish a 'most valued jihadist combat training zone' for al Qaeda supporters."

The article concludes with the report's caveat to America not to engage Iran next.

"Going to war with Iran," Rogers said, "will make matters far worse, playing directly into the hands of extreme elements and adding greatly to the violence across the region. Whatever the problems with Iran, war should be avoided at all costs."

Sad the day that a democracy must be reminded thusly. War should always be the last option, after all other options have been proven futile. Iraq was not an intractable problem until GWB decided to make it one. Iraq did not pose a threat to U.S. national security until after the U.S. invaded.

Due to GWB's bum rush, many U.S. citizens still cannot disentangle the concepts Muslim from Iraqi from terrorist. It remains a confusing welter, and all such good citizens can do is put up yellow ribbons, maybe send off care packages of needed toiletries to troops and obey a president who must know more than they.

Of course, it should be intuitively obvious that any foreign invasion of an Arab country will force all moderates and peaceful Arab advocates into an untenable position. Invasions provoke extreme reactions; this does not require research. A simple reading of history will show this.

Invasions lead to unconventional guerrilla wars of resistance. Here at Ranger, we are embarrassed to say such an obvious thing. What would Americans do if we were invaded by a superior military force? A middle school history book will reveal the answer.

Why are U.S. leaders oblivious to the obvious?

By George

Little Boy Blue, come blow your horn.
The sheep's in the meadow, the cow's in the corn.
Where is the boy that looks after the sheep?
"He's under the haycock, fast asleep."
Will you wake him? "No, not I;
For if I do, he'll be sure to cry."
--Little Boy Blue, Mother Goose

You make me run from god
You make me terrified
I pray the lord your soul to keep
I hope you wake before you die
--Evil is So Civilised, Boy George
__________

Retired Lt. General Ricardo Sanchez added his name to the lengthening list of retired officers who have miraculously found the courage to speak out against the flub-up that is the Iraq War, once their retirement pay is secured ("No End in Sight" in Iraq.)

"There is no question that America is living a nightmare with no end in sight," Sanchez said. He broadly criticized the State Department, the National Security Council, Congress and the senior military leadership "during what appeared to be a broad indictment of White House policies and a lack of leadership to oppose them." [Lt. Gen. Sanchez would be among the last cohort he blamed, but this may have escaped his notice.]

In fact, the Commander is responsible for all that the troops do or fail to do. In the Iraq goat-screw, substitute Commander-in-Chief for commander.

Take away all of the other ancillaries, and you are left with the one person to blame: Boy George.

Taking the Low Road

Ranger Question of the Day:

Is it possible that Justice Roberts and Justice Alito
paid for their Supreme Court seats by agreeing
before nomination not to review torture, habeas corpus
or rendition cases while GWB is still in office?
A Faustian bargain, bought and paid for.
__________

Oh! ye'll take the high road and
I'll take the low road,
And I'll be in Scotland afore ye
--Bonnie Banks of Loch Lomand, traditional Scots tune
__________

"Getting home" sounds nice, but in this song it just means you're dead.

The New York Times' Frank Rick penned a good column this weekend on the complicity in torture endemic to this administration (The 'Good Germans" Among Us.)

"Ten days ago The Times unearthed yet another round of secret Department of Justice memos countenancing torture. President Bush gave his standard response: “This government does not torture people.” Of course, it all depends on what the meaning of “torture” is. The whole point of these memos is to repeatedly recalibrate the definition so Mr. Bush can keep pleading innocent.

"By any legal standards except those rubber-stamped by Alberto Gonzales, we are practicing torture, and we have known we are doing so ever since photographic proof emerged from Abu Ghraib more than three years ago."

One must wonder why U.S. Army snipers can gun down unarmed suspects and then beg off by citing the "only following orders" explanation. It is clear and obvious (even to a Ranger) that all the miscreants tried and found guilty at Abu Ghraib were only following orders, also.

Why does that defense work now, but didn't back then? In light of current adjudication, the West Virginia posse should be released. Either all should be prosecuted equally, or none should be.

The entire shooting match is a legal joke. The Abu Ghraib trials prove one thing: the system will find a soldier guilty if the C in C needs a scapegoat. As always, soldiers are expendable, especially if they are hillbilly reservists.

"I have always maintained that the American public was the least culpable of the players during the run-up to Iraq. The war was sold by a brilliant and fear-fueled White House propaganda campaign designed to stampede a nation still shellshocked by 9/11. Both Congress and the press — the powerful institutions that should have provided the checks, balances and due diligence of the administration’s case — failed to do their job. Had they done so, more Americans might have raised more objections. This perfect storm of democratic failure began at the top."

While this encapsulates the con job, it does not address the underlying problem, namely, WHY?

Why is our system incapable of stopping a steamroller run up to a phony war? Why are we as citizens powerless to stop it? Why is Congress sitting on their collective hands? "As the war has dragged on, it is hard to give Americans en masse a pass. We are too slow to notice, let alone protest, the calamities that have followed the original sin."

Rich goes on to mention the armor procurement problems, the failure of Walter Reed and other military hospitals and the problems with the contractor corps' frontier mentality:

"We first learned of the use of contractors as mercenaries when four Blackwater employees were strung up in Falluja in March 2004, just weeks before the first torture photos emerged from Abu Ghraib. We asked few questions. When reports surfaced early this summer that our contractors in Iraq (180,000, of whom some 48,000 are believed to be security personnel) now outnumber our postsurge troop strength, we yawned. Contractor casualties and contractor-inflicted casualties are kept off the books."

Ranger sees the "stringing up" of the four Blackwater employees in 2004 as a backlash by Fallujah residents who had reached a saturation point following contractor abuses and malfeasance. This was not terrorism, but neighborhood street justice. Why did the crowd mete out such barbarous behavior which would seem to exceed the norm?

"We ignored the contractor scandal to our own peril. Ever since Falluja this auxiliary army has been a leading indicator of every element of the war’s failure: not only our inadequate troop strength but also our alienation of Iraqi hearts and minds and our rampant outsourcing to contractors rife with Bush-Cheney cronies and campaign contributors. Contractors remain a bellwether of the war’s progress today. When Blackwater was briefly suspended after the Nisour Square catastrophe, American diplomats were flatly forbidden from leaving the fortified Green Zone. So much for the surge’s great “success” in bringing security to Baghdad."

Exactly. If the surge is so successful, why can't embassy staff travel freely in the new people's democratic republic of Iraq?

"Last week Paul Rieckhoff, an Iraq war combat veteran who directs Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, sketched for me the apocalypse to come. Should Baghdad implode, our contractors, not having to answer to the military chain of command, can simply 'drop their guns and go home.' Vulnerable American troops could be deserted by those 'who deliver their bullets and beans.'”

I have not seen this eventuality discussed by the pundits or the administration. What does happen if there is a general uprising, Mogadishu-style? Will the contractors risk their bacon to deliver the beans? Ranger somehow doubts it, unless of course the bonus packages keep coming.

"Our humanity has been compromised by those who use Gestapo tactics in our war. The longer we stand idly by while they do so, the more we resemble those 'good Germans' who professed ignorance of their own Gestapo."

Our treatment of the occasional dissenters is damning. Lt. Commander Matt Diaz went to prison for leaking the names of the Black Hole of Gitmo disappearees. He was true and righteous in this action, and the system pounded him into the ground. Not a good omen if we wish to escape the epithet of the hypocritical "Good German."

Rich concludes with a call to action to rouse the Congress, to fillibuster all night if need be. "There is nothing left to lose except whatever remains of our country’s good name."

What a shame. What a sham.

He's No Fool

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool
than to speak out and remove all doubt
--Abraham Lincoln
________

Let it never be said that Clarence Thomas hasn't studied the luminaries.

Justice Thomas has reentered the scene recently after the release of his bitter autobiography. The above entry on his taciturn presence was noted in the 6/8/07 edition of The Week magazine.

According to this tally, Thomas has spoken an average of 70 words per year while serving on the bench (+/- whatever's been added since June.) Not a bad gig.

I wonder how many of those words were repeats.

Brunching

"This one is for learning the lessons of Afghanistan"
_____________

Having brunch with an out-of town friend this morning (that's what Kerry-lovin' liberals do, right--brunch?), I heard a very simple truism from my communicant. It grew out of a Sociology 101 discussion on the authoritarian mindset, whose adherents yearn for direction and will unblinkingly follow the father-leader into the mouth of hell. To wit,

"Why is it people are so afraid today? I grew up with the Soviet menace around every corner, and thousands of actual nuclear warheads aimed right for the U.S., yet now I'm expected to give up my rights to be protected from men like Osama bin Laden, who live in caves who do not have nuclear capacities?"

It is a simple and valid question. How have we come this far (backward), and forgotten that we came through an actual threat intact, and forgotten the ways in which we achieved that detente?

Input is welcomed.

--Lisa

Where We Started From

Ooo and it's alright and it's comin' 'long
We got to get right back to where we started from
--Right Back Where We Started From,
Maxine Nightingale

The truth does not change
according to our ability to stomach it
--Flannery O'Connor
__________

This is beyond the frontier of Ranger's concerns, yet in an esoteric way it merits a mention as counterpoint to the war.

From today's Orlando Sentinel, a gruesome little tale from the depressed town of Okahumpka, in Lake County:

The daughter of an 83-year-old woman admitted dumping her [mother's] body on the side of a clay road and cashing two of her retirement checks, Lake County sheriff's Sgt. John Herrell said Friday.

Debra Loreth, 53, placed her mother, Jeanne Vasa, in a garbage bag and dropped her body on a rural road in west Lake County near Okahumpka, Herrell said.

Loreth told detectives that she dumped her mother's body in hopes she would be discovered and given a proper burial, Herrell said.

Loreth was issued a misdemeanor charge; no foul play was involved.

This is the area I left, and this sort of story hearkens me back to the sorts of people I knew populated the hinterlands of towns like Astatula, Umatilla, et. al. Lake County borders Orange, entertainment capital of the state, for sure. The ignorance and poverty there is pervasive (as it is here, and probably, across the tracks, is in most communities in America.) The article goes on to mention that Ms. Loreth works "odd jobs" in the tourist area.

She and her sort are the unseen Americans working in kitchens, emptying rubbish bins -- all the "odd jobs". Barbara Ehrenreich lived and exposed this subculture in her book, Nickel and Dimed: On Not Getting by in America. So it goes in Ms. Loreth's life, and hopefully mama will get that burial.

Meanwhile, Iraq's new suzerain, America, has its hands full trying to get electricity back on for the people in the desert for more than a few hours a day. Back to the way things were in the good old days, under Saddam.

--Lisa

Strange Days

Everybody's talking and no one says a word
Everybody's making love and no one really cares

Everybody's runnin' and no one makes a move
Everyone's a winner and nothing left to lose

Nobody told me there'd be days like these
Strange days indeed -- strange days indeed
--Strange Days, John Lennon
__________

I just received the following response from my local congressman, Allen Boyd. Generally speaking, I am in agreement with the representative on most issues. He is a Vietnam vet, and has helped Ranger as a constituent in the past.

"Thank you for this opportunity to address H.R. 1416, the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act, with you. Your views, as a member of the North Florida family, are important to me. I appreciate the thoughts you have communicated.

Please know that I agree with you that the United States should protect the right of all citizens to Habeas Corpus. Since the founding of our nation, we have always fought for the goals and ideals that our founding fathers laid out for us in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. We have championed democracy and individual freedom around the world and have served as the model for representative government and individual freedom for over 200 years. It is important that our nation continue this course and keep protecting the rights of all people.

H.R. 1416 repeals provisions of the Military Commissions Act that eliminated the jurisdiction of any court to hear or consider applications for a writ of habeas corpus filed by aliens who have been determined [sic] by the United States. This legislation is currently in the House Judiciary Committee. While I do not sit on this committee, I will continue to monitor this bill and keep your thoughts in mind.

Thank you again for bringing your views to my attention and adding your voice to the ongoing debate. Please continue to write to me, and I encourage you to sign up for my e-newsletter by visiting my website at www.house.gov/boyd."

Sincerely,

F. Allen Boyd, Jr.
Member of Congress

How can you deny or restore a right which is guaranteed by the Bill of Rights? Are we not a nation which abides by the rule of law? Am I alone in my outrage, that a right guaranteed to us in our Constitution has been effectively rescinded?

Even the good representative doesn't have it quite right when he talks about "protect[ing] the right of all citizens to Habeas Corpus." We live by the motto, "All men are created equal"-- writ large. Not just our men; not just RNC members. The rights of habeas corpus accrue to all individuals incacerated within our system.

Why have my rights now become antiquated? What has superannuated them? Some sort of rheostat on my freedoms, operated at the whim of the president? He is not elected to tinker with the foundations of my government (even though he has stated he thinks the power of the legislative branch is invested in him.) Maybe his getting two branches combined in one makes up for V.P. Cheney not belonging to any (?)

What happened to checks and balances?

I guess checks are what this administration writes to float the war, and balances are something to be avoided at all costs.

--Lisa

Let's get out of Iraq and get back on track

You can't really say a lot of things nowadays or
somebody in a helicopter might come down a rope on you
--Merle Haggard
__________

Our friend Minstrel Boy at Harp and Sword mentioned Merle Haggard in his Friday music list, which reminded me of a recent Washington Post interview with Mr. Haggard (If a song actually had an opinion, that's the first thing they'd throw in the Trash.)

Merle (Oakie from Muskogee) Haggard's politics have undergone a transition to the liberal in recent years. For those who don't know, Merle has had the benefit of seeing life from both the inside of the big house and the outside, so I imagine freedom is a cherished commodity. Below are a few excerpts from the interview:

In the new "What Happened?" you wonder where America went. Any theories?

In the last 10 years, we've lost most of what we claim to be fighting for. We have a police state -- helicopters flying above houses, looking to see if they can see some marijuana. America has gone downhill.

You're not shy about expressing your political opinions, are you?

I should be. I got a family, and there's somebody liable to kill me. But it's still a free country -- to a point. You can't really say a lot of things nowadays or somebody in a helicopter might come down a rope on you.

(T)here are some conditions in the United States that don't resemble Americanism. Where are the people that care about freedom? We're overseas fighting for it and people are giving their life for it when it doesn't even exist here.

The last bit seems especially poignant. He may be an Okie, but he's not dumb.

--Lisa

The Next War

Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace
--Imagine, John Lennon

Instead of a coalition of the willing,
what we really have is a coalition of contractors!
--Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va)
________

The buildup to a military confrontation with Iran is transparent, yet Ranger wonders why that must be. A cynic might say oil, but GWB's messianic fervor also suggests a forced showdown in the Holy Land emanating from his Revelation-based orthodoxy. The True Believer will not be dissuaded from his mission.

Wesley Clark wrote in the Washington Post last month about this projected war. But if Clark believed his own rhetoric, this next war could be avoided via dialog with our political adversaries.

"How tragic it is to see old men who are unwilling to talk to potential adversaries but seem so ready to dispatch young people to fight and die."

"War is the last, last, last resort. It always brings tragedy and rarely brings glory. Take it from a general who won: The best war is the one that doesn't have to be fought, and the best military is the one capable and versatile enough to deter the next war in the first place" (The Next War).

If we were serious about wanting to mentor the world into democracy, we would first show ourselves as members in good standing of that world. We are not talking Neville Chamberlain appeasement. Iran is not seeking to co-opt another nation. Instead, we appear brutish and buffoonish, in equal measure. Columbia invites Iranian President Ahmadinejad to speak, only to have the president of that institution preemptively berate him.

Are you in or are you out? If the man is too onerous, then make a stand via non-invitation. But do not waffle, and do not play cat-and-mouse. That is not dignified behavior, especially toward a head of state.

It is not a realistic policy to isolate nations from the world body politic. Iran needs to be politically engaged rather than isolated. Isolation breeds belligerence. Mr. Clark would be wise to admit that U.S. actions in Iraq and Afghanistan have done more to destabilize the region than the Iran regime has. Iran is not an aggressor-state; however, the U.S. is.

It would be wise for U.S. policy-makers to realize and accept the fact that Iran has legitimate military concerns for her own security and military safety. The U.S. sits on Iranian borders and sponsors Kurdish terrorist raids and Special Forces incursions into Iranian sovereign territory.

In addition, the U.S. embraces preemptive invasions and regime change. Given this scenario, it seems logical that Iran would want nuclear weapons for defensive purposes. The U.S. has an offensive nuclear weapons policy, yet attacks Tehran for wanting tactical defensive weapons. This is hypocritical, but par for U.S. policy.

We seem to be backsliding into a dangerous xenophobia -- a neo-dark age, shepherded in by the hawk neo-cons. An emergent tribalism which seems all but built in to our genetics. The U.S. opposes WMD for others, yet has the largest nuclear stockpile in the world. To the people on the other side of the gate, this fact probably doesn't seem fair or safe.

Does this behavior seem like sanity to you?

Lies, Lies

Lies, dripping off your mouth like dirt
Lies, lies in every step you walk
Lies, whispered sweetly in my ear
Lies, how do I get out of here?
--Lies, Rolling Stones
________

Various news outlets quote the administration price tag of the Iraq war at $10-12 billion per month. However, as recently reported in the Washington Post, the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) estimates the actual cost of the war to be $720 million per day, or $500,000 per minute. Which, at $21,600,000,000 per month, is roughly double the figures being bandied about. $21.6 billion dollars per month spent on occupying Iraq, to what end?

The AFSC, a peace group affiliated with the Quaker church, is based on analysis of the work of Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz and Harvard public finance lecturer Linda J. Bilmes. As the group's estimate takes into account "not only the immediate costs of war but also ongoing factors such as long-term health care for veterans, interest on debt and replacement of military hardware," it seems a more realistic accounting than that of the administration.

The AFSC also provides alternative uses for those funds, such as stateside education programs which are getting the short shrift.

"The $720 million figure breaks down into $280 million a day from Iraq war supplementary funding bills passed by Congress, plus $440 million daily in incurred, but unpaid, long-term costs."

"In 2006, Bilmes, who was an assistant secretary of commerce under President Bill Clinton, and Stiglitz, a former chief economist at the World Bank, placed the total cost of the Iraq war at more than $2.2 trillion, not counting interest. The American Friends group used cost breakdowns and interest projections from the Congressional Budget Office to calculate the daily cost of war . . . "

The actual cost is there for all to see, yet the bargain basement price of $12 billion still zings around the airwaves.

The administration's cost estimate is as big a lie as is the war.

Vertigo

You shouldn't keep souvenirs of a killing.
You shouldn't have been that sentimental.
--Vertigo (1958), Hitchcock
_________

On rhetorical police, deconstructing a random article on Iraq from last week ("Troops Kill Scores of Insurgents"). Topic: defining al Qaida in Iraq (AQI):

[1] The subhead says, "Iraq battles involve al-Qaida militants." O.k. -- Ranger agrees; they are militants.

[2] "Iraq's Defense Ministry said in an e-mail Sunday afternoon that Iraqi soldiers had killed 44 terrorists over the past 24 hours. The operations were centered on Salahuddin and Diyala provinces and around the city of Kirkuk, where the ministry said its soldiers had killed 40 and arrested eight. It said 52 fighters were arrested altogether."

The Army arrested eight. If the Army was involved and the 52 were "fighters," then wouldn't they be "captured" (not arrested), and wouldn't (shouldn't) the Geneva Conventions apply?

Conflict: are they terrorists or militants?

[3] "In a separate operation, U.S. forces killed two insurgents and detained 21 others during weekend operations to disrupt al-Qaida in Iraq networks in the Tigris River Valley."

This indicates that AQI is insurgent, since the killed reflected an action to disrupt AQI.

In this one small AP article, AQI is alternately militant, terrorist and insurgent.

Ranger would feel a lot better if he knew what his Army was doing in Iraq.

Q for Queasy

Thomas Friedman mused in his Generation Q about the "quiet generation" -- today's college students who though they do good, do not participate in protest against injustice. I mention it because I like the concluding lines.

He surmises that email and computer commerce have curtailed the impulse to execute a live gathering. Young people today do virtual confabs. He suggested Social Security, the deficit and the environment as salient issues they might get concerned about.

He concludes by noting the statue of James Meredith, the first black admitted to Ole Miss in 1962, he'd seen on a recent tour of three Southern schools. "The Meredith bronze is posed as if he is striding toward a tall limestone archway, re-enacting his fateful step onto the then-segregated campus — defying a violent, angry mob and protected by the National Guard.

"Above the archway, carved into the stone, is the word 'Courage.' That is what real activism looks like. There is no substitute. "

Meanwhile, the House passed the "War Profiteering Prevention Act" (HR 400), "To prohibit profiteering and fraud relating to military action, relief, and reconstruction efforts, and for other purposes." It is hard to be for such a thing as war profiteering, yet fully three Congressman voted against the bill.

Small number to execute such venal bravery, but can you guess what political party they hailed from?

--Lisa

T Squared

John Yoo, Torture Memo author

Hear the loud alarum bells
Brazen bells!
What a tale of terror, now, their turbulency tells!
In the startled ear of night
How they scream out their affright!
--The Bells (1849), Edgar Allen Poe

The bells are ringin' for me and my gal.
The birds are singin' for me and my gal
--For Me and My Gal, Meyer/Leslie/Goetz
_________

The title refers to the subjects of this piece -- tinnitus and torture. Outrage, with a personal bent.

GWB the equivocator recently stated unequivocally that the U.S. does not engage in torture (isn't this a logical contrapositive: if a liar says something is not true [i.e., that the U.S. commits torture], isn't that the same as an honest person saying the truth is that the U.S. does commit torture?) Specifically, this addresses John Yoo's munificent definition in his original "torture memo" that torture is punishment that could result in organ failure.

Tinnitus is organ damage to the ear that can be caused by exposure to loud sounds. It can result in sensorineural hearing loss and a cascade of other problems emanating from the initial abuse. Some experts believe the damage is not only site-specific, but the brain is also involved.

Some effects of tinnitus are depression, inability to concentrate, irritability, impotence and even suicide. Tinnitus cannot be treated or reversed. Once you get it, you've got it for good.

Most combat soldiers have this condition and often don't realize it because the ringing and buzzing become the normal background.

One of the favored enhanced U.S. interrogation techniques is sleep deprivation combined with sensory overload/deprivation, combined with excessively loud music played over long periods of time. Tinnitus is being inflicted through this high decibel bombardment upon suspect's ears and brains.

As a bilateral tinnitus sufferer, Ranger knows the torture of lifetime damage to his ears. From that experience, I can assume lifetime disabling problems are being inflicted on these subjects. By John Yoo's definition, treatment equivalent to that which can result in organ failure is torture. Ears are organs.

The administration and intelligence agencies must stop this deplorable interrogation technique. It is neither cute nor effective. Inflicting this condition intentionally is torture in this Ranger's book.

Whitewash

Where are your legs that used to run
When you went for to carry a gun
Indeed your dancing days are done
Oh Johnny, I hardly knew ye
--Johnny I Hardly Knew Ye, Irish ballad
__________

The Warrior Transition Brigade is yet another ridiculous tack by the Army to patch a broken system. It is a supposed attempt to shepherd seriously wounded soldiers through the veterans health care maze with the help of a newly created brigade of 166 soldiers, which "became operational in June ('07)" (Combat Vets Lead Wounded Troops, VFW magazine, October '07).

It is "broken up into three companies of three platoons each. Platoons comprise three squads. The Army says it will become the model for all its medical treatment facilities." Why do I think this is an absurd band aid? Let me count the ways--

[1] This is a phony press-oriented measure to deflect criticism from a system which is labyrinthine for even relatively healthy service members to navigate.

On a purely rhetorical basis, since when is a brigade manned by 166 soldiers? Counting the 700 wounded personnel assigned, this is a total of 866 warm bodies. Calling this figure a brigade is hyperbole targeted at civilians, who are being groomed to see the military as the fix to any problems facing our nation.

A good withdrawal tactic from Iraq would be to leave 866-man Brigades in Iraq and bring the rest of the troops home. If 866 man Brigades are good enough for the troops at Walter Reed, the it should also suffice for the Iraqis.


[2] "The hope is that wounded soldiers will respond better to sergeants and officers, many of whom have combat experience." May as well throw a prayer in there, too. It looks like what should be based on good science has now become co-opted by faith-based rhetoric, as well.

These are broken soldiers, many of whom are predictably feeling betrayed, depressed, desperate. Most are facing a painful transition back into civilian life following protracted medical treatments. It is nonsensical to force them back into the very command structure which they are now being mustered out of. They are not part of a brigade, so don't phony one up.

This faux brigade is an insult to people in need of informed medical intervention.


[3] "Some [patients] are non-compliant, deliberately missing appointments, [brigade leader Col. Terrence McKendrick said]. "Some of that is based on despair of the condition they're in."

Of course their despair must be palpable, and that is exactly why MSWs and other professionals should be performing this function, rather than this phony "brigade". Soldiers of the combat arms are trained to kill, not heal. Using them as hospital admin types is gross mismanagement.

In an odd ending to the story, we are told the "brigade" is housed in a building named in honor of medic Cpl. Angelo Vaccaro, killed by an RPG in 2006, the first service member to earn two Silver Stars in the Phony War on Terror (PWOT ©).

"A Plaque next to Vaccaro Hall's entrance. . .describes his final moments." I suppose this was designed to alleviate flashbacks amongst the patients (?)

In a Washington Post article on the brigade three months ago, Army Maj. Lionel Walton, who has been treated at Walter Reed since January 2005, said "To me, it's cosmetic stuff." One soldier's mother called it "hogwash." It is definitely a whitewash.

What is most grating about this story is the inappropriateness of the response. When soldiers are so traumatically wounded that they are never to return to duty, start transitioning them immediately into their civilian life. Stop this absurd imposition of the warrior tag upon a wounded soldier returning to his society.

Images of warrior may make the civilian population feel more impervious to threats, but that label only further alienates these soldiers from a culture which has no place for the professional warrior, thereby keeping him in an isolated limbo land.

God of the Marketplace

A thing is not necessarily true because a man dies for it

--Oscar Wilde

~Sacrificed on the Altar
of the God of the Marketplace~

rangeragainstwar©

But if It's True. . .

But your flag decal won’t get you into Heaven anymore,
We’re already overcrowded from your dirty little war
Now Jesus don’t like killin’
No matter what the reasons for.
And your flag decal won’t get you into Heaven anymore
--Your Flag Decal Won't Get You Into Heaven, John Prine

_________

According to VFW magazine (October), "Beginning this fall, four movies that show Iraq soldiers in a negative light will be released."

The VFW incorrectly states these movies show Iraq soldiers in a negative light. In fact, they depict the soldiers and their lives in a realistic light. If it is unpleasant to view, many things in life are. When did the word "negative" supersede "truthful", when discussing unpleasantries?

"In the Valley of Elah's. . .'uplifting' theme tells of the murder of an Iraq vet by fellow soldiers.

"Tinseltown is not at all reluctant about releasing these films while the war is still underway."

And why should they be? This is America, and no OPSEC is being compromised. You can get more information on the war any day of the week online at Wikipedia.

Ranger saw the above mentioned movie and was impressed with its treatment of the war. The main character, his son, and his deceased son (killed in the 82nd) were all portrayed as dedicated soldiers who loved their country and their Army. So how is this anti-War?

The protagonist calls Iraq a "shit-hole," and of course, he is right. The war was backdrop to the story line, and it was dealt with fairly and clearly. The dialog was devoid of value judgments on the war, so how is depicting one family's experience in and surrounding their service anti-war?

It may be anti- their candy-colored version which marches in lockstep with the administration, but as Winston Churchill said, "the truth is incontrovertible; malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is."

In the conclusion, the U.S. flag is flown with the field down, to symbolize the nation's distress. To many of us observing and participating, the nation is in an undeniable state of emergency that needs to be fixed. The bleeding must be staunched. This is not anti-war; this is fact.

Since PTSD, drunkenness and domestic violence are facts of life for many returning combat soldiers, how is their portrayal anti-war? When did facts, albeit unsavory ones, become "anti-war"? It is what it is.

In fact, if the Elah movie were anti-war, the VFW should applaud it. Needless, senseless wars should be protested, and who better than veterans themselves to do so?

The concluding paragraph is a non-sequitur. It begins by quoting from film critic Lew Harris, "Hollywood's much more political now and less afraid to speak out. The filmmakers and actors themselves are far more politicized than they were in the 1960's." It concludes,

"This explains why, despite all the bravery displayed by GIs in Afghanistan and Iraq, no movies are about to be released that highlight the heroism of Americans."

How does one's honest depiction of a true (or fictionalized) situation equate with being gratuitously "anti-war"?

The facts speak for themselves. These depictions lack a saccharine overlay telling the audience how they should feel (presumably, according to the VFW, great about whatever happens), which in itself would be a form of propagandizing. There is no bouncing ball for the audience to follow patriotic tunes stitched in to the story. That is propaganda.

True--our GIs have displayed great bravery in theatre, and heroism is a daily occurrence. Elah does not deny this fact. It merely refuses to wave little flags and be wrapped in a yellow ribbon. It dares to show the underbelly wrought by all of that heroism.

Sometimes, you just don't feel good about the things you see and hear. Maybe that is o.k., and in fact, necessary in order for right action to occur. In our over-medicalized, over-prescribed and over-pathologized society, we are told that feeling bad is not good. Sometimes, feeling bad is your warning that something must be changed.

It is time for us fat, dumb and happy old soldiers at home to display the same virtues by opposing the needless sacrifice and slaughter of our young generation of soldiers. Our sworn oath demands it.

As a Ranger, my vow is to never leave a soldier behind.

--Jim and Lisa

Putting their Money Where Their Mouth Is

________

Another advert from the current DAV magazine, but this is a good one.

Yellow ribbons really burn Ranger's ass.

Recently Ranger and Lisa ate at a restaurant in Jacksonville, FL, which sported a large "We Support Our Troops" tableau painted across the entire window-fronted restaurant. Yellow ribbons aflutter, fearsome eagle screeching down -- the whole nine yards. Red, white, blue and yellow. Big time patriot message.

When paying, Ranger asked for his military discount. Do you think even a token 5 or 10% was offered? Nada. The sympathetic waitress offered, "Now, if you'da been a cop, we can give cops discounts."

In contrast to the loud-mouthed troop-supporting pretenders, the above ad is a welcome gesture, though a rarity.

Every year, Golden Corral restaurants have a Military Appreciation Day, on or around Veterans Day. It is an impressive event without fanfare or crass advertisement. Few people I've mentioned it to even know about it. Ranger commends them for this sincere gesture of appreciation.

I am not affiliated with the restaurant in any way, but our local franchise also gives free meals to DAV members once a month before the DAV chapter meeting. They are not remunerated by the local chapter for this gratis hosting.

It would be nice if more flag-waving yellow ribbon patriots extended similar gestures of appreciation.

Liar, Liar

The Adventures of Pinocchio (1883)
Enrico Mazzanti, illustrator

Liar, liar, pants on fire
Your nose is longer than a telephone wire
--Liar, Liar, The Castaways

Pinocchio: What's happened? [upon seeing his nose]
The Blue Fairy: Perhaps you haven't been telling the truth, Pinocchio.
Jiminy Cricket: Perhaps?
--Pinocchio (1940)

I am a law only for my kind. I am no law for all.
Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Friedrich Nietzsche
_________

Sweet patootie. Our Supreme Leader spoke at a press conference Friday, and we learn from the horse's mouth (?) that this administration's detention and interrogation policies for terrorism suspects are legal (Bush says U.S. "Does not Torture"). Thus spake The W.

Well, that's a relief. Ranger had erroneously assumed that extralegal renditions, denial of habeas corpus, waterboarding, sensory deprivation, extended solitary confinement and unending incarceration were not written in a legal framework.

"When we find somebody who may have information regarding a potential attack on America, you bet we're going to detain them, and you bet we're going to question them," he said during a hastily called Oval Office appearance. "The American people expect us to find out information, actionable intelligence so we can help protect them. That's our job."

So American justice has devolved to this--if you might have information, you will be whisked away to secret locations and have your nuts put in a wringer.

As an American, I do in fact expect my country to protect me, but this does not mean the president may function as a military dictator and use the Constitution as toilet paper..

Further, GWB said, "We stick to U.S. law and international obligations." How can he even utter these words, having shamelessly circumvented the Geneva Convention on several accounts, a document to which we were once a proud signatory?

The Washington Post reported Homeland Security Adviser toady Frances Frago Townsend echoed GWB's words yesterday in a CNN interview. "If Americans are killed because we failed to do the hard things, the American people would have the absolute right to ask us why," Townsend said. Of course, what she fails to understand is that the "hard thing" seems to be upholding the rule of law.

"Speaking emphatically, the president noted that 'highly trained professionals' conduct any questioning. 'And by the way,' he said, 'we have gotten information from these high-value detainees that have helped protect you.'"

Of course, these highly trained professionals are former KGB types--Egyptian, Saudi and Jordanian secret police sorts adept at torture. It should be a federal statute that U.S.-held prisoners cannot be interrogated by anyone other than U.S. assets and on U.S. soil.

"He also said the techniques used by the United States 'have been fully disclosed to appropriate members of the United States Congress' — an indirect slap at the torrent of criticism that has flowed from the Democratic-controlled Congress since the disclosure of the memos."

The "appropriate members" being a few fawning sycophants. That a few Republican members of Congress were briefed does not confer legality on these sleazy, illegal activities. Possibly the briefed members of Congress can be charged in war crimes tribunals for complicity and accessory after the fact.

The unclassified facts available to the taxpayers contradict every words that drops out of Bush's mouth.

Liar. liar, pants on fire.

Both Sides of the Fence

Keeping you up-to-date from the horological world as found in the recent Robb Report "Watch Collector," Issue No. 1, where not so much watches, but tourbillons are sold, witness the Ghengis Khan.

From Swiss watchmaker Ulysse Nardin, I'm guessing the Ghengis appeals to those feeling particularly domineering or rapacious; perhaps both. Special timepieces these -- you can't just walk up to the display case and pull one out. The representative demurred on the pricing request, saying it depends on the watchmaker with whom you work.

When I asked for a ballpark, she fairly gasped: "Who are you?" "Just someone who saw it in the watch magazine, lady." I was given the ballpark: $650,000 suisse francs. With a slightly favorable exchange rate for the U.S., 1 USD:1.17 francs, you'll pay for this watch what you could buy a shack for in Ojai, should such a thing be available.

Meanwhile, in my neck of the woods, if you asked about the horological forecast, you'd probably get a concerned look about the state of AIDS and other STD's in our counties, one of which leads the state in number of newly reported AIDS cases this year. These people won't be buying the Ghengis Khan anytime soon.

--Lisa

Where the Boys are

Where the boys are, someone waits for me
Till he holds me I wait impatiently
--Where the Boys Are, Connie Francis

Sometimes there seems like times
that men ain't got no need for women
--Ado Annie, Oklahoma! (1955)
________

Ranger Question of the Day:
Why hasn't Mark Foley been prosecuted? If he were a schoolteacher in Lake Worth, he'd surely be doing some time, both in the big house and on probation.
_________

Case you needed it, another reminder of the endemic hypocrisy amongst the party faithful.

On the year anniversary of Rep. Mark Foley's resignation, the press recounts it thusly:

"On Sept. 29, 2006, the veteran, well-liked congressman resigned in shame after illicit instant-message exchanges he had with teenage congressional pages came to light (GOP still struggling a year after ex-congressman Foley's fall)."

As always, the offense was not the offense of sexual predation, per se, but rather that it came to light. Foley's escapades with his pages had long been the stuff of speculation in his circle before the light was shone on the reality.

The article notes that many of his former constituents "still express admiration for the job the affable Lake Worth native did during six terms in Congress. " More affable to some, than to others.

One of those admirers was Betty Smith, 80, of Stuart, who "was such a fan of her former congressman, she started a club called Foley's Fillies." Bit of a misnomer there; "Foley's Colts" might've been more apropos.

The Ranger question says more about our society than it does about Foley's Folly.

Say it Loud, Say it Proud

Paper tiger, man of steel
The hero from the movie reel
So killer cool
So he can't feel a thing
--Paper Tiger, All
__________

Mr. Limbaugh, you are a phony hero, pandering to a bunch of phony patriots.

On his radio program last week, Rush Limbaugh originally called veterans "phony soldiers" for speaking out about Iraq war. IED-injured Iraqi vet McGough then challenged Limbaugh's dismissal of veterans who oppose the war.

On the 9/2 program, Limbaugh compared McGough to a suicide bomber. Limbaugh said people were "lying to him about what I said, then strapping those lies to his belt, sending him out via the media in a TV ad to walk into as many people as he can walk into."

This insanity must stop. It is Brian McGough who was bombed. A suicide bomber seeks to destroy, whereas men and women like McGough seek to enlighten. To stop the destruction.

Limbaugh's view of soldiers as robotic pawns is insulting in the utmost. When those soldiers are used as photo ops to prop up GWB, Limbaugh has no problem. Dissent troubles him. For his ilk, liberal is a naughty word, and dissent equals turncoat. Except these aren't turncoats.

Speak up if this jingoistic blather applied to America's veterans bothers you, too. Call his program, 800-282-2882. Give him a piece of your thinking, patriotic mind.

Kristallnacht Redux

A German soldier is having fun cutting the beard
of an elderly Jew in Poland

Ranger is ashamed of his Army, his country, and this Phony War on Terror (PWOT ©). Shame is the operative word.

We are told about efforts to "bend [Iraqis] back to our will." That is operating from a fallacious premise, and it is too reminiscent of oppressive regimes throughout history. "Convert, and we spare you."

Am I supposed to feel warm and fuzzy about "reshaping Iraqi detainees"? Obviously, this is not about putting weight rooms into the prisons. When did the U.S. Army get into the business of religious indoctrination or "deprogramming"? In effect, "brainwashing" is now official policy. Shame.

The lead-in from the WaPo coverage:

"The U.S. military has introduced 'religious enlightenment' and other education programs for Iraqi detainees, some of whom are as young as 11, Marine Maj. Gen. Douglas M. Stone, the commander of U.S. detention facilities in Iraq, said yesterday.

"Stone said such efforts, aimed mainly at Iraqis who have been held for more than a year, are intended to 'bend them back to our will' and are part of waging war in what he called 'the battlefield of the mind.' Most of the younger detainees are held in a facility that the military calls the 'House of Wisdom.'

"As a result of the increased U.S. troop presence in Iraq this year, the number of Iraqis in U.S. detention has swelled from about 10,000 last year to more than 25,000. The effort to reshape attitudes among the growing detainee population is aimed at addressing a problem that has vexed U.S. troops in Iraq for the past four years: Military detention facilities have served as breeding grounds for extremist views, transforming some prisoners into hard-core insurgents, according to military analysts (U.S. Working to Reshape Iraqi Detainees)."

Are these the same analysts that got us into this phony war? Probably not, since the original screw-ups have probably been promoted. Time to give the young analysts an opportunity to mature. What a wonderful cycle.

"Stone said he wants to identify 'irreconcilables' -- those detainees whose views cannot be moderated -- and 'put them away' in permanent detention facilities. Psychiatrists, psychologists, counselors and interrogators help distinguish the extremists from others, he said."

Democracy in action. And what law allows U.S. forces to put foreign citizens into permanent detention?

Another tack is vocational training and basic education for about 7,000 of the held Iraqis, at U.S. taxpayer expense. Meanwhile, back on the range, countless U.S. students have to struggle to make ends meet while attending vo-techs and community colleges and universities.

Maybe unemployed U.S. citizens should go to Iraq to get job training. Then again, Ranger reckons this is already the case. We call it the U.S military. Like the USMC slogan says: "The Few, The Proud, The Unemployed."

Maj. Stone says the Iraqi Vice President told him America could win the war if they applied his techniques to the rest of the country. Does this mean we will win IF we put the entire Iraqi nation under detention? Possibly this needs to be explored with prison contractors.

But here is the part that paralyzes the mind:

"Stone described a sort of religious insurgency that occurred at one detention facility on Sept. 2. 'We had a compound of moderates for the first time overtake . . . extremists. It's never happened before. Found them, identified them, threw them up against the fence and shaved their frickin' beards off of them. . . . I mean, that is historic.'"

Historic. . .really, Maj. Stone? The Nazis did the same thing to their orthodox Jewish population on Kristallnacht and thereafter, with as much relish and disgust as Maj. Stone summons for his Iraqi charges. Keep in mind, Maj. Stone is a man in his late 50's, early 60's; not a young punk.

Ranger is glad that his father fought the Nazis. It has made all the difference. Now, democracy rules.

Unless you are wearing a religious beard, and are on the wrong team.

Miracle on a Mountaintop

_________

"Miracle on a Mountainside" is an ad for the upcoming Disabled Veterans Winter Sports Clinic which ran in the September/October DAV magazine.

Wouldn't it be more of a miracle if the U.S. would stop a useless, phony war that is destroying the lives and bodies of young American serviceman on an hourly and daily basis?

Group Therapy

_________

Ranger Question of the Day:
How are the government -sponsored deaths in Myanmar
any different than the U.S.-sponsored killing in Iraq?
_________

"Crackdown Snuffs Hopes in Myanmar" . . . Why doesn't one ever read headlines like, "Crackdown Snuffs Hopes in Iraq"? At least the violence in Myanmar is an indigenous government acting against their own citizens. In Iraq, it is a foreign army of occupation imposing its will upon a foreign nation. Why is the Myanmar government criticized for silencing dissent, but the U.S. is not? Both are suppressing the actions of the citizenry of a country.

Here's a brilliant idea: Let GWB adopt the Myanmar pro-democracy movement's fighting peacock flag as his own banner, in a show of solidarity. I can think of no bird mascot more appropriate for Boy George than the preening and showy peacock (the dodo is extinct.)

Note the photo accompanying the article: the soldier is carrying a U.S.-made M-16 rifle courtesy of Colt Industries and the U.S. government. My country will criticize Myanmar for shooting on a dissenting crowd, yet it placed the rifles in their hands.

One wonders how and why U.S. tax dollars wangle such marvels of democratic achievement. The M-16 is ideal for crowd control since it has three saftey/fire modes. Safe-single-group therapy (full auto).

It is also interesting that the soldier on the left has a .303 British WWI SMLE bolt action rifle. He is probably a National Guard called up to fight domestic terrorism. Britain and the U.S. -- still a great team.

Mistaking Movement for Progress

Dressing a Terrorist, Ajdin

"President Hamid Karzai yesterday offered to meet the Taliban leader and give militants a government position only hours after a suicide bomber in army disguise attacked a military bus, killing 30 people – nearly all of them Afghan soldiers (Afghan President Offers Taliban Militants a Role in Governing)."

Some progress, huh? The U.S. has spent billions of dollars in this rat's nest, and has had good soldiers die there, for what? This is called back to square one. And how many turns of the cross do you think our soldiers should make?

Karzai said,

"If a group of Taliban or a number of Taliban come to me and say, 'President, we want a department in this or in that ministry or we want a position as deputy minister ... I wish there would be a demand as easy as this. I wish that they would want a position in the government. I will give them a position."

"The U.S. Embassy in Kabul has said it does not support negotiations with Taliban fighters, lebeling them as terrorists, although the UN and NATO have said an increasing number of Taliban are interested in laying down their arms. NATO's ambassador to Afghanistan, Daan Everts, said this month that the alliance would look into the possibility of talks."

Surely an accommodation must be reached within Afghan society, but why is the U.S. doing it?

For the longest time, the rhetoric was "baby steps," implying forward, if slow, motion. Unfortunately, baby steps is as big a lie as is the concept that the Taliban is an organization that targets the U.S. overseas. While the Taliban certainly possesses the potential, their policies were inward and reactionary, and as such they were no threat to America.

Destroying al-Qaida was the mission. Destroying the Taliban was not a baby step, it was a misstep. Now the indicators reflect a Taliban which will enjoy a place in the new Afghan government, funded and created with U.S. blood money.

Ranger is not anti-Taliban, but is anti-GWB policy which has run amuck with our nation's funds, spent our international goodwill and run our military aground.

Very anti this short-sighted and larcenous administration, whose only vision is to line their pockets and larder their platform of voting faithfuls by pushing some sort of apocalyptic showdown in the holy land. This 21st century hucksterism is unpalatable, no matter how much treacle is poured on top.

Afghanistan is not a "good war." It is a black hole for U.S. time and money.

The Dead Zone

Well, here we are; well, here we are!
Just watch us rolling up a score.
We'll leave those fellows behind so far,
They won't want to play us any more!
--Yale Boola, Hirsch

_________

"When you get in the Green Zone, there is a physiological phenomenon, I think, called Green Zone fog. There is such a sense of winning. they will show you, it’s death by powerpoint. . . .It’s always that their argument is winning. If you press, after the third of fourth time . . .you start to see what we all know, which is [that] the surge is unsustainable. . . . We need a strategic redeployment out of Iraq. . . . Three hundred million dollars a day; 3,700 of our finest soldiers and Marines are dead; 30,000 catastrophically wounded and maimed. And a military [that] right now is well beyond its ability to deal with other contingencies."
--Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-CA), 8/28/07 Thinkprogress.org interview
[printed in 9/15/07 issue of The Washington Spectator]
__________

Military and White House briefings often suffer a disconnect from reality. Briefings have a half-life of about one day and often reflect a wish, versus objective reality.

Officers are especially acculturated to superlatives and grandiose statements. It all begins with our phoney Officer Efficiency Reports (OERs) that guide our phony careers. These phony careers are the basis of our phony wars, making for a closed loop. We actually begin to believe our own rhetoric.

The same goes for our citations for our awards and decorations. It is unacceptable to say, "He is an average soldier and does an average job." That reality is translated into: "Capt. Blank is the most exceptional Company Commander in the Brigade, and possess the potential for positions far above his rank." This stated potentiality implied he knows how to expose his orifices to penetration.

Ranger has always thought that being an officer is a little like being a female porn star. Both have to pretend that they like it in the ass. You are going to get screwed, so in a sense you do learn to accept it. Life in the quid pro quo.

The Army system fails miserably to realize that the actual man described in the Official Personnel File and OER is not the same as the records show. The records are hyperbole, the man, reality. General Petraeus is a fine example of this phenomenon at its highest game point.

He is only a man and events are beyond his control, but that's not the hype. The Army is not filled with Odysseus types, as the death and wounded lists show. We are limited by our cultural blindness and rigid professional training. The military does not accept free thinkers, and Petraeus is no exception.

As fine a man as he may be, he is the product of his West Point education and Army culture. I would argue that his PhD does not make him more qualified to do his current job. It appears to add another layer of competency, but does not advance his current assignment. Only time on the battlefield can do that.

A look at Petraeus's chest shows no individual valor awards, no Combat Infantry Badge. Which is more important for a combat leader -- individual combat experience, or a PhD?

Generals Washington, Scott, Lee, Grant, Pershing, MacArthur, Patton, Eisenhower, Bradley, Westmoreland and Scwartzkopf did not need advanced degrees to fight their armies successfully. Soldiers should attend to basics.

Ranger fondly remembers his superior officer in RVN--Capt. Norm Dupuis [DOO-pus], a direct commission from E-9 to 0-2 in Special Forces. No college degree and beaucoups combat experience. We were staff weanies on a B-team (B53), and our boss, Col. Glock, was a West Point paper flash individual. To make it worse, he was a tanker.

Well, old LTC Glock was fond of briefings and charts, and of course, OERS and threats of adverse OERs. Once in our daily dog and pony show (our version of the power point), Norm used a chart that tallied up how many times we had used the other charts; what a brilliant statement!

As a mustang, Norm was not threatened by OERs because he knew he would eventually revert to an E-9 after the endgame and RIFs. He had the freedom to say, "The only way an OER can hurt me is if you roll it up and poke it in my eye."

And he was right. Due to institutional bias, SF types were heavily rifted (reduction in forces) and eliminated from the officer corps. This still haunts the Army, since their CI institutional combat experience and knowledge was effectively purged, in favor of reversion to a now-outdated Cold War mindset.

Generally speaking, the officer personnel in the 1970's and 80's SF served in the Airborne units in RVN and generally had no SF combat experience. This is also the period that SF became flooded with Ranger tabs, changing the mindset of that organization irrevocably. Poor way to run an Army which needs many skill sets in today's world.

But of course, their briefings continued, tight and professional.

Should I Stay or Should I Go?

Should I stay or should I go now?
If I go there will be trouble,
And if I stay it will be double
--Should I Stay or Should I Go, The Clash

The Sky is cryin'
Can't you see the tears roll down the street?
--The Sky is Crying, James/Robinson/Lewis
__________

Ranger Question of the Day:
Why does America care if the Iraqis kill each other after we leave?
Presently the U.S. taxpayers are paying billions upon billions to kill Iraqis.
Wouldn't it be cheaper to let them kill each other?
___________

The standard justification for U.S. troops remaining in Iraq is that violence will erupt when they leave. This ignores the fact that the violence has already done erupted, even with the presence of U.S. combat power, and possibly --just possibly -- the level of violence will abate when U.S. forces leave the country.

Either argument, whether to stay or go, is both emotional and unquantifiable.

Lacking a soothsayer or a template, no one can predict accurately what any course of action will produce.

The U.S. government should do what is best for America. Iraq is not an American state.

Not Cost-Effective

_________

Ranger Question of the Day:
Have all of these 19,000 supposed dead been buried according to
the Geneva Conventions with graves marked and reported to the
International Red Cross?

_________

As a palliative measure for the masses, the White House recently released figures showing the latest Good News: U.S. forces in Iraq have killed upwards of 19,000 insurgents.

Ranger doesn't care a diddle about dead bodies and fully understands that people get killed in wars, but why, and to what purpose, is the question.

These 19,000 were not al-Qaida types targeting U.S. citizens in our homeland (oops--HOMELAND.) Many no doubt simply objected to a foreign army of invasion on their home ground. And who is to blame them? Ranger would do the same if a foreign power invaded this nation to remove our WMD. Ranger had grown rather fond of U.S. nuclear weapons, and will fight anyone trying to take them away.

Ditto those who would try and save me from my corrupt, lascivious society and feeble-thinking president. While the liberator's intentions might be for the good, as they would see it, I have come to enjoy and identify myself with many things American. Even if I don't like the rest, I don't want someone else coming in and rearranging it for me.

Injecting some reality into the 19,000 figure: This means a friendly/enemy kill ratio of 19,000 : 3,750, +/-. This is an unacceptable figure, and in classic counterinsurgency literature, the usual figure is 10 : 1 for an operation to be considered a success.

The 19,000 figure is nothing to write home about. But as usual, all straws are grasped to make this sow's ear look like a silk purse. We created them, now we're happily counting them as significant strategic kills to enhance democratic freedoms.

The combatants we are killing in Iraq are not valuable al-Qaida worldwide assets, those capable of killing U.S. citizens. It is unlikely that hardcore al-Qaida operatives are going to stand mano-a-mano with U.S. combat power. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was not captured on the battlefield. It is only the lowly riflemen that are captured on the battlefield.

Now divide 19,000 into $500 billion and what is the figure? In rough measure, $25 million a head? For folks wearing shower shoes? The individual cost of killing each nasty ass Iraqi insurgent is neither cost-effective nor fiscally acceptable. Aside from the fact they pose no actual threat to the American continent.

Please remember that GWB recently threatened to veto a $35 million spending bill to fund medical care for uninsured U.S. children. As always, we gladly pay for death-dealing, but are unwilling to fund life-affirming programs. Especially not for non-strategically placed people.

Killing people is not the formula for success, if success means making the U.S. safer from terrorist attacks by the group al-Qaida. Killing the right people is the requirement, and in Iraq and Afghanistan, we are far off the mark. Al-Qaida is not the same as a Taliban or an Iraqi insurgent. The threat is al-Qaida, so capture and kill them. The Army is not the man for that job.