Response

Response: "blog stage eight"
I agree with you Eric that “A room full of people with guns is a bad place for a gunman,” but also a bad place for all the people in the room. Proliferating guns across American university campuses is not going to deter someone who has reached a point where they are willing to go on a shooting spree because they are already unstable and don’t care. People like to tout “if everyone thought everyone else had a gun the world would be a safer place” but that is a simplistic view of the human mind. All humans' possess the urge to kill, but for most we are only capable of acting upon these urges in times of extreme rage. Both, the recent university shootings and headline grabbing school shootings were calculated and cold bloodidly carried out by gunman who mentally unstable. These people did not care if they died and would have carried out these attacks even if they thought they were walking into a room full armed classmates. It’s the same mentality that a suicide bomber uses when attacking a military checkpoint – they know they are going to die, and they know the checkpoint is armed to the teeth, they just don’t care.
The obvious answer to your question of “security guards carrying hand guns why can’t I” is because they have received “training” and you haven’t. In reality, these people probably aren’t anymore qualified to carry a gun then you, but for American’s to respect a position of authority we need to see a gun so that’s why they have one. I personally feel guns have no place in learning institutions, but that’s beside the point. The military requires its combat arms occupations to under go thousands of hours of training to be competent to handle firearms and to be able to use their inherent killing instincts. Law enforcement under go similar training. I doubt that an average college student has the time or inclination to undergo the amount a training necessary to make them able to react to a situation quickly enough to stop it let alone be a competent shooter, one who won’t blow the back of the head off the student in front of them. These situations happen in seconds and most people would be dead before they even knew what hit them.
Another good reason for keeping guns out of college student’s hands is that most are unstable, immature, and irresponsible. The military doesn’t even allow its members to conceal carry on bases and these people work day in and day out at the art of killing. I would not be surprised to see accidental shootings, gun related suicides, and alcohol related shootings sky rocket at Utah universities. Consider the average university student life. You are in a mentally stressful environment where alcohol abuse is common place and adult supervision (18 year olds are not adults I was one, I’ve worked with them, and I’ve lived with them and most do not have the same maturity level as some one 5 years older) is relatively non- existent. Throw a gun in the mix and that sounds like a situation I would not want to live in.
Arming students does nothing to solve the issue of why students want to shoot up their classmates in the first place. Canada has more guns per person then the US but yet they have far less gun related crimes and school shooting incidents, just something to think about. It would be wonderful to be able to walk around dishing out vigilante justice like in the movies, but in the real world the situation isn’t like that. We could require everyone in America to carry a gun but it still won’t stop crime or shootings.

Painformation

High Ground

Humanity has demonstrated on countless occasions how cruel we can be to each other. Americans are no stranger in the cruelty department but now it seems we will openly proclaim it. Torture seems to be a popular subject in the news and in Washington lately. Everyone seems to focus on how and why torture was approved but this does not seem to be leading to an end of its use. The President’s cabinet that seems to be pulling all the heat, but last time I checked it was the President that was suppose to be in charge in the White House not the people he appoints to advise him.

Torture has always been a taboo subject in the United States. In the circles where it is practiced it is considered a necessary evil but one that is not approved or discussed especially by the President, but as it has been said, September 11^th changed everything. Now the President can go on television and openly discuss a subject that means it is ok to hurt the information out of someone. Have we become so blinded by revenge that we no longer see or care the suffering we are inflicting? Besides this many in the intelligence community even point out short comings of intel gathered from torture victims. A perfect example is the misinformation used to justify going to war with Iraq, which was gathered using torture.

But this is America so Congress will keep looking for who is responsible for this situation and cabinet members will keep blaming each other. The President will remain blissfully ignorant and the American people will be outraged or just deny it ever happened, so I guess the status quo is maintained and all will be alright. Or maybe somebody that’s actually responsible will actually be held accountable for what they have done. Maybe America will actually live up to her hype. We’re always looking for a subject where there is no gray areas and this is one. Torture is wrong. Our government should not endorse, use it, or support any country that does use it. Come on America join me on the moral high ground the weathers pretty good up here.

Response

U.S Death Toll in Iraq War Reaches 4,000

It is not unfortunate that the President “has committed our country to a nonessential war” it’s that so called “liberal thinkers” like yourself have swallowed the exact same lie as the so called “conservative thinkers”. Allow me to introduce myself and my “unique perspective”. I’m Sergeant Michael Nordstrom USMC and my two tours in the name of the noble cause of Iraq has given me a unique perspective. I would first like to know what you refer to as “meaningless war”, is any war “meaningful”? I think the share holders of Halliburton stock would find this a VERY meaningful war. Meaning their pockets are full. The people of Iraq would also probably be able to find some meaning in this meaningless war. Especially, when taking into account that the IBC(Iraq Body Count) puts documented war related deaths at over 90,000 and total deaths since the start of the war is estimated at over a million with 5 to 7 million Iraqis refugees still displaced. I think this shows what is the deadly serious meaning of “meaningless wars”.

But at least we are way ahead(or behind) in the body count. That is unless you take into account the service members who die of their wounds out of country, apparently they don’t count the same, and you probably better toss in the ones who commit suicide because of undiagnosed post traumatic stress disorder. Also don’t forget the thousands of wounded, many who will face the rest of their lives as amputees or permanently disabled. Maybe you shouldn’t put so much in the value on each sides losses.

I’m also curious about your friend Corey. What is the dirty job he’s having to do to bring freedom to Iraqis. Is it publicly shaming people at a checkpoint? Or maybe kicking in the door to a house Gestapo style in the dead of night? Maybe he’s lucky enough to drive the roads of Iraq, keeping KBR goods and services flowing in and out of U.S. bases. Does he get to help in the construction of all the new hospitals and schools? Though you would think they might focus on trying to get running water, electricity, and oh yeah solving the fuel crisis the country with the 2^nd largest oil reserves in the world. You should ask him if a civilian contractor replaced him so he could stand guard. Whatever the rewarding work he is doing I do hope he isn’t have to kill too many Iraqis to get them to understand freedom, they don’t seem to understand they are free now as long as they do what we say.

I would like to know where you came up with the idea that a change in Iraq policy, such as reducing troop levels, is going to result in dead peoples’ “hard work” going to waste. How many more need to die be enough to justify the 4,000 already killed. The “good” we have done has already been lost and only gets worse as this war stagnates. The situation in Iraq is far worse then in 2003. The Iraq government is corrupt and purposely divided in order to keep the region in turmoil. The Iraq Army is impotent, and as recent combat shows, still unable to fight without heavy U.S. military assistance. The living situation is the worst it has been yet in the 5 years of conflict, with the most basic of services barely functioning. I challenge you to go yourself and protect these “good works” if they are so important to you. For a Democratic supporter you sure spout the same Republican nonsense, like those who believe that not supporting war spending will leave the troops without beans and bullets in Iraq?

If you plan to continue to call yourself a liberal thinker then think liberally. Do not justify violence with violence. Iraq will resolve itself however it will with or without U.S. interference. Educate yourself on the actual situation and encourage your Marine friend to do the same. It’s easy to believe a lie if you don’t know the truth. The “obvious criminals of 9/11” aren’t in Afghanistan they are in the White House. And if you really want to know what I think those 4,000 dead service members really want is to not be dead.

You Can't Handle The Truth

You’re Not Lying If You Truly Believe It

Hillary Clinton’s visit as First Lady to Sarajevo didn’t go quite as she recalled especially how she arrived. While claiming she landed under sniper fire and had to run for cover, it actually seems that sniper fire was possible but didn’t occur nor did she and her daughter run for cover. By her account some could say she lied. But Sen. Clinton is not the first Presidential candidate to embellish upon their adventures. What was it that Hillary hoped to gain by embellishing a story that is somewhat dangerous to begin with?

Sarajevo and Bosnia in 1995 was definitely no vacation spot. Mrs. Clinton was on a fact finding mission that resulted in our military presence in Bosnia. Obviously the area was not a safe one. Certainly her “war” experience would not compare to someone like John McCain’s but it is an experience that Obama could not claim. It makes little sense that someone who touts to have so much political savvy and experience could trip themselves up so easily.

I think this is just another indication of the direction the Clinton Campaign is going. It almost seems that Hillary’s people have managed to get their hands on Carl Roves playbook and are haphazardly running the 2 minute drill. It’s sad to see what has become of Hillary Clinton’s campaign. They now cling to super delegates, tout minor victories that gain no ground in the primaries, push for re-votes in Michigan and Florida, and seems to be developing a very Bush-ish memory. It asks the question: is this the new road to the White House or will the public finally see these tactics for what they are? Will we continue to be steered to elect certain people who are willing to go to any length to be elected or will we finally look for candidates not afraid to bear themselves to public scrutiny and keep their integrity?

What I would encourage Hillary to do is embrace her actual gains and achievements, not embellish them. There’s no need. She has done some great things, she has helped pass some great legislation. She has also made some mistakes. If she wants to win my vote then show me that she can learn from mistakes( especially ones concerning the truth). Stop shaking your finger when other candidates throw some mud, disprove it if it's false or own up to it if it's true, and if she can’t or won’t do that then she needs to bow out. America deserves honesty for a change. I recommend checking out her opponent’s speech on race because if he keeps that up her campaign won’t stand a chance.

Mrs. Smith Tours Iraq

Thelma Drake wants Angelina Jolie to testify on Iraq

In this story from the dailypress.com, apparently the most informed person on the situation in Iraq, according to Virginia Representative Thelma Drake, is famed actress Angelina Jolie. I guess this would be seemingly good news if Jolie had any experience outside of acting and moonlighting as the United Nations goodwill ambassador. I think this just goes to show how desperate and out of touch or leaders have become on the entire issue. The story goes on to point out that this would not be the first time Hollywood stars have descended on Washington to lend their hand in lobbying matters but if Congressional leaders are really looking for a report from U.N. officials I think we could really find someone who has a little more authority on assessing the situation then the goodwill ambassador. It also is surprising that U.S. officials would be seeking U.N. assistance in Iraq now after years of shrugging off U.N. opinion in any matters concerning Iraq.

This piece also reports that Jolie points out that last years surge appears to be working. It seems odd to me that no one points out that around the end of every winter since Operation Enduring Freedom started we finally seem to be winning in Iraq. Do so many people fail to realize how miserable and cold most of the Middle East especially Iraq is during the winter. Most insurgent operations occur at night and when it’s cold insurgents would much rather relax indoors waiting for warmer weather. I also object to calling the surge a success because it just goes to show that we should have had more troops in the first place, and that by taking so long to do so our leaders caused thousands of casualties of service members and Iraqi civilians that should not have occurred in the first place.

I am not contending that Mrs. Brangelina’s visit to Iraq was not for an important and good cause but I am saddened to see that yet again our leaders would rather use the opinion of Hollywood’s famous as opposed to the experienced and informed in their attempt to shift the blame that so squarely rests on their shoulders.

Who's To Blame

Marine Report Blames 100s of Deaths on Armored Vehicle Delays

The new MRAP(Mine Resistant Ambush Protected) vehicles are the solution to lowering Marine casualties in Iraq. At least that’s what the Associated Press’s article found on Fox News’s website of Franz J. Gayl’s report would have you believe. In the article his report blames upper level Marine generals failure to buy and field the expensive MRAP vehicles resulted in hundreds of deaths of Marines in Iraq and Afghanistan. What the article fails to state is the Marine Corps’ policy and practice as a mobile amphibious force which the MRAP does not conform to. By increasing armor and ground clearance the vehicles sacrifice speed, maneuverability, and range, which are key to the Corps’ war fighting doctrine. Great if you are fighting an enemy that relies solely on mines but useless in a fast paced ground offensive. Heavy and with limited combat roles, as opposed to other vehicles in the Marines’ arsenal, they would have no place in the post Iraq/Afghanistan fleet.

Though they do increase survivability for the crew, these vehicles are just as vulnerable as any vehicle in Iraq to roadside bombs. This solves nothing unless our strategy is just to drive around and get blown up, and that is not a strategy the Marine Corps wishes to use. These vehicles are a short term solution to a long term problem. The Army, who fields thousands of the MRAPs, have begun to see that the enemy has already adapted to them. IEDs(improvised explosive devices) are not a static weapon, and will continue to change as our combat vehicles change. They are already capable of defeating any armor system we have. A perfect example of this is the M1A1 Abrams Tank, one of the most highly armored vehicles in the world. Several of these have been destroyed in Iraq by a variety of IEDs which also resulted in the deaths of some their crew. By increasing armor you increase the size of bomb needed to destroy the vehicle, which increases the danger and injuries of those using the heavily armored vehicles, but is a death sentence to those not using the vehicles, like our support troops and Iraqi allies.

Also, Spending millions of dollars on new vehicles shows that Washington has no intention of solving long term issues in Iraq. As a Marine I saw first hand our inability to overcome IEDs even with advanced technology. Throwing billions of dollars at one part of an issue does not solve the whole issue. A combat zone is a combat zone, dangerous and deadly. It is a place where people get hurt and die. The only way to stop casualties and deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan is to not be there. Marine Corps leadership should not be blamed, as this article would have you think, for the dangers of a combat zone or for thinking about what is best for the long term. The true blame rests squarely on those who continue to put service members in harms way.

A Few Little White Lies Never Hurt Anyone...

A politician lying isn’t really news anymore. We accept and justify it by telling ourselves “that’s just how it works.” But is there a line that shouldn’t be crossed? Apparently not. Recently The Center For Public Integrity complied a database of all the “false statements”, or less eloquently put, lies that the Bush Administration made leading up to the invasion of Iraq. The information they complied was not new or secret and was readily available to the public and officials. It shows all the false statements that the administration, from President Bush down, has made or released during their campaign of propaganda for the war in Iraq. Apparently we only need 935 lies to get us in the fightin’ mood. The President himself made over 500 of them. Some of the key falsities are listed in the main overview but you are also able to search through the database using any of the many search options. They also compiled the statistics into graphs that show the crescendo of lying just before the initial shock and awe campaign and the following ground offensive which continues today. Other graphs chart how public opinion was affected. You can read the overview and search the database yourself at:

Iraq: The War Card

It is important to see how this administration has made us the instigators of a war based completely on lies and have yet to suffer any repercussions. We, as those responsible need to decided what to do with this administration. Whether that’s demanding greater control over matters of war by congress, impeachment, legal punishment by our judicial system, or even turning these people over to the international war crimes tribunal. They have set a scary precedence for the U.S. We never had the moral high ground which use to justify this war. We preemptively invaded another country for no clear reason other then to kill some of them and make some of us rich. Not for our protection as we were told. If we continue to have no accountability for those we put in charge then we are telling our officials "hey its ok as long as you lie to us first." If nothing happens to these people then I guess we did let the terrorists win.