Army Ranger Describes 2004 Roundup

Poor people, all the way around. We are still not addressing the real problem which is petroleum dependency.

Oh get off it Nick. How about you report on the ZILLIONS of GOOD ACTS our soldiers commit? This is yellow journalism at its worst, YELLOW for cowardly.

Nick, sick puppy, why don't you take a break?

Really, this is just a typical ploy to hide the real problem. Well, I guess the terrorists who behead civilians & post it on the internet are much more dignified than our troops, right? So are those suicide bombers who target civilians. After all, they're martyrs, right?
War is hell & the fog created by war is even more hellish. I wish the ivory tower dwellers would adopt the same philosophy of the Blackfoot Indians: "Never judge a man unless you've walked a long distance in his mocassins."
Personally, a few 35klb daisycutters in the right places is what that region needs.
Merry Christmas & a Happy Hannukkah to those trying to defend civilians from the threat of evil, wherever they are :) henry

I didn't think this article was meant to speak of the soldiers in bad light. It was speaking more against the evils of war and our involvement with it

The article speaks to the belief that we are not helping ourselves at all when unfortunate things like this happen . War is hell , and Pat Tillman himself had a change of heart before he was killed . This we know through readings of his journals and from conversations he had with fellow soldiers . Now we have McChrystal , who orchestrated the illegal coverup of Tillmans death , and Obama committing us to more squandering of lives and money we dont have . We are sheep and our shepards have thrown in with the wolves .

Would those who voted for Obama who are against this war be willing to nominate someone else to run on the Democratic Party ticket in 2012?

Even before the election, I saw on the news that Obama said he wanted to escalate the war in Afghanistan. How can people endlessly criticize the war while voting for someone who wants it escalated?

How interesting that when Obama was accepting the Nobel Peace prize he was talking about how violence is needed because you can't reason with the opposition. I wonder what the Nobel committee thought about that?

Remember the simple rule in American politics: If a politician is an adulterer it's ok as long as he/she is of your party. It's also OK for a poltician to be pro-war as long as he/she is a member of your party.

Far be it for the liberal press to criticize Obama for doing the same things Bush did, and far be it for conservative "pundits" as they're called to call Republicans to the carpet for their moral "indiscretions". Meanwhile, the beat goes on.

Doesn't matter who is in the White House, there is no easy out of this problem.

B.C. , the option was to vote for McCain /Palin or to waste your vote for a thrd party . If McCain/Palin had somehow won , we would be bombing Iran , Afghanistan, and Vermont . Palin would have quit and McCain would have appointed Lindsay Graham as V.P. For me it was a choice of the lesser evil once again. What was your solution ?

"What was your solution ?"

Good question. Either get behind a third party, and if that is impractical, shape the party to which you belong *before* the general election.

I got into a discussion on the Paul Berenson radio show when the Democratic Party nomination was very much up for grabs and told Paul was well as his guest former Assemblywoman Hannah-Beth Jackson that given what they were saying about the war it was clear to me that they should support Kucinich...no go, they wanted Hillary Clinton even though Kucinich clearly was more in line with their thinking on the matter. Also, Kucinich, unlike Clinton and Obama, was against the Patriot Act. The mentality in the last election was "Anybody but Bush" so here we are with a president who is escalating the war. In 2000 it was the same deal: While people dispute whether or not Bush fairly won the election, what is not disputed is that he won the nomination even though he was not a true conservative and as has been pointed out he spent money like a drunk sailor.

So taking the third-party option off the shelf, what people need to realize is that simply getting the opposing party out of office is not enough but rather shaping your own party and making sure the people who are nominated are not clones of the other side simply wearing masks.

I know people feel good because Bush is out of office, but if they are honest with themselves on the war issue, they would stop laying this all on Bush and admit that their own party is heavily involved in this conflict.

For what it's worth I remember back in 1988 I asked about a dozen people (I remember it was an even number) who they were voting for and the results were dead even between Bush and Dukakis but every person I spoke to told me that their vote was for the lesser of two evils.

Given what I've said I wonder if these people are truly anti-war or if they simply have to have someone to hate?

B.C. , I agree with everything you have said ,yet you still leave me wondering . With the viable candidates on the ballot , what was your solution ?

"With the viable candidates on the ballot , what was your solution ?"

The solution would be that people vote for who they think is best, not for who they think is most likely to win.

In this case I stand by my vote . Throwing away a vote for a mythical, pie in the sky candidate with no chance to win would be tantamount to giving an extra vote for the worst candidate .

"In this case I stand by my vote . Throwing away a vote for a mythical, pie in the sky candidate with no chance to win would be tantamount to giving an extra vote for the worst candidate ."

How do you get change if you don't vote for it?

"We must have looked like cyborg soldiers with glaring eyes and lasers on our weapons,"

and you wonder why they hate us?

Our soldiers are like a nightmare public relations campaign.

What would you do if a foreign soldier knocked down your door and lined up your family? I don't think you would join their side. That seems to be the armies strategy.

chalk it up to another failed war right along with vietnam and the drug war.

What a great article.

"If they weren't terrorists before, they are now," Boraas recalled thinking at the time.

Yep, that pretty much sums it up right there. We are creating MORE terrorists by fighting in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is NOT a defensive war, this is only inciting more hatred for our country. It is not serving our national interests.

PLEASE watch the following short video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqAF-A...

THERE IS somebody in Washington who knows what is going on. We had a chance to elect this man, or Dennis Kucinich as President... but we didn't. I must have told hundreds of Obama supporters about his hawkish foreign policy, and NONE of them listened. Take responsibility for your poor decision and denounce Obama and his policies!!

"What if our foreign policy of the past century is deeply flawed and has not served our national security interest?

What if we wake up one day and realize that the terrorist threat is the predictable consequence of our meddling in the affairs of others, and has nothing to do with us being free and prosperous?

What if propping up repressive regimes in the Middle East endangers both the United States and Israel?

What if occupying countries like Iraq and Afghanistan and bombing Pakistan is directly related to the hatred directed toward us?

What if someday it dawns on us that losing over 5,000 American military personnel in the Middle East since 9/11 is not a fair tradeoff with the loss of nearly 3,000 American citizens no matter how many Iraqi, Pakistanian, Afghan people are killed or displaced?

What if we finally decide that torture, even if called "enhanced interrogation technique", is self-destructive and produces no useful information and that contracting it out to a third world nation is just as evil?

What if it is finally realized that war and military spending is always destructive to the economy?

What if all war-time spending is paid for through the deceitful and evil process of inflating and borrowing?

What if we finally see that war-time conditions always undermine personal liberty?

What if Conservatives who preach small government wake up and realize that our interventionist foreign policy provides the greatest incentive to expand the government?

What if Conservatives understood once again that their only logical position is to reject military intervention and managing an empire throughout the world?

What if the American people woke up and understood that the official reasons for going to war are almost always based on lies and promoted by war propaganda in order to serve special interests?

What if we as a nation came to realize that the quest for empire eventually destroys all great nations?

What if Obama has no intention of leaving Iraq?

What if a military draft is being planned for for the wars that would spread if our foreign policy is not changed?

What if the American people learned the truth, that our foreign policy has nothing to do with national security, that it never changes from one administration to the next?

What if war in preparation for war is a racket serving the special interests?

What if President Obama is completely wrong about Afghanistan and it turns out worse than Iraq and Vietnam put together?

What if Christianity actually teaches peace and not preventive wars of aggression?

What if diplomacy is found to be superior to bombs and bribes in protecting America?

What happens if my concerns are completely unfounded?

Nothing.

But what happens if my concerns are justified and ignored?

Nothing good."

-Ron Paul

Don't look to our 'leaders' as reasons or answers, but to the profiteers and the money men. I wonder if any of the 3rd party candidates would sell out as well. Can't trust a politician anyways. Obama said in the past he was for single payer and an end to the wars. We still in Iraq?
With Republicans, we'd just get more lies. Good cop, bad cop....
Squandering the lives of our people in other countries for years and years is disgusting when somebody is profiting as they figured out how to do in WWII. America has a whole heap of shame piling up in Washington D.C., or is it something else?

I am a West Point grad , my classmates included Odierno, McChrystal, Walker, Kidder, Gardner and just about every other senior grade commander in the Army today. So please grant me the fact that I know a bit about the Army.

That said; here's a brief picture on how the combat Army works, not how the rear echelon pukes make it seem. First, most senior COMBAT officers are liberal when dealing with their troopers. They have to be. To lead 18 - 19 year olds into combat you better be able to relate to them, to talk to them, motivate them, and bleed with them.

Every combat leader I know hates war. The American officer corp would surprise you on how we detest going to war. You need to realize that war is the result the diplomatic failure of politicians and the citizens that elect them. When politicians fail and we are sent to war, we go to kill...we go to win. We want it quick, fast, brutal. We want to be out of there faster than you can imagine. That way we get to come home sooner and we save troopers lives. It's only when the politicians step back in, or fail to support the AO (ala George Bush), do we see the situation that now exists in Afghanistan. The political mission is completely different and that is what you have been discussing in these posts.

Now I can certainly understand Specialist Boraas' opinions. I have seen the prisoner videos; no detainees were beaten. Handled roughly - maybe, beaten no. The Tillman episode was tragic. The military "cover up" regrettable. And I can personally tell you that Stan's involvement was far far different from what was said above or what you have been told.

Boraas - "We must have looked like cyborg soldiers with glaring eyes and lasers on our weapons," Well son, I want my troopers, including you, to look like you will kill anything that moves. And being a Ranger you know this is true. As for the posters above....it is better than looking like a bunch of Santa Barbara Scientology protestors parading up and down the State street. I want the enemy, and the locals, to piss in their pants when they see a combat trooper.

"Falk described the troop-build up announced by Barack Obama as a "murderous waste," predicting, "This will have the political effect of generating the security threat we're supposed to be preventing." Falk...if you are reading this...you are an idiot. Until you have picked up a weapon and covered your friends back as the tracers fly, or pulled his body out of the line of fire, your arm chair, bush league opinions matter naught.

"Juergensmeyer, who was likewise critical of the escalation, suggested that Obama was hoping to leave Afghanistan in "more thoughtful fashion" than when the United States first attacked it in 2001."

Juergensmeyer - You are spending too much time in the pot dispensary...man you are so off base I can't even begin to say. "More thoughtful fashion?" God man, just stay home...you are a danger to all around you. Daniel Petry

" Liberty and democracy become unholy when their hands are red from innocent blood " Ghandi .

If your imagination only goes to quotes, I prefer Vegetius - "Therefore, he who wishes peace, should prepare for war; he who desires victory, should carefully train his soldiers; he who wants favorable results, should fight relying on skill, not on chance." Sic vis pacem, para bellum.

Enjoy your freedom Geebs because many people shed their blood for you to have the freedom to even express your opinion without fear of death. The old adage...goes: "If you can read this thank a teacher, if you can read this in English thank an American soldier."

@ BillClausen...you are right on target about the Indy. Daniel Petry