From the newsletter of March Forward! We join the military for many different reasons. Some of us want to have access to a college education. Some of us want job training and a steady paycheck. Some of us join to get U.S. citizenship. Some of us need to get out of debt or need to get off a destructive path. Some of us join out of pride, patriotism and a genuine desire to be a part of some greater, collective good. Many of us made the decision early-while still in high school, enticed by recruiters' promises of cash bonuses, adventure and opportunity-while some of us joined after years as a worker, drawn by the military's full health care and housing benefits.
Whatever the reason, we all found ourselves wearing the uniform of the U.S. military. What did we actually join? What is the role of the U.S. military in the world? What does it mean to be a soldier following the dictates of U.S. foreign policy? When we sign ourselves away to the military, what are we being used to do?
In recent years, many of us ended up in Iraq or Afghanistan. We are told that as a soldier in the U.S. military we are defending the interests of the United States. This does have an ounce of truth-but only an ounce. We are defending the interests of a particular class in the United States. It is only a wealthy minority whose interests are being defended in Iraq, Afghanistan and the more than 130 countries where U.S. troops are stationed.
For the past several years I have been a member of the local peace group, Pacem in Terris. One outgrowth of membership and action with the group was my recent political campaign. The driving force for political action was then and remains today my staunch opposition to the ongoing occupation of Iraq. Our nation has many issues to be resolved today. We will not be able to address many of those issues so long as we continue to borrow and spend $10 billion a month in Iraq.
Has there ever been a more politically tone-deaf administration than this one? I can understand Bush's need to score points with the base. But if you're going to veto legislation to take a stand against "big government," couldn't you pick something more palatable than quashing healthcare for poor children? And to say we can't afford $35 billion for sick kids, at the same time you're asking for around $190 billion - that's $190,000,000,000! - in additional war spending?
How did this numbskull ever get to be president? No, really.
As I was sitting down to tackle this week's toon, I was looking to do something with that notion of tone deafness. But as I brainstormed symbols that spoke to children paying the price for America's war machine, I kept coming back to the same image: Jules Feiffer's Munro.
For those not familiar with Feiffer, the guy is on the top rung in my pantheon of creative heroes. Pulitzer-winning editorial cartoonist. Obie-winning playwright. And, in 1961, he was the writer of an Academy-Award-winning animated short called "Munro."
"Munro" started life as a short story in Feiffer's 1957 cartoon collection, "Passionella." The story revolves around a four-year-old boy named Munro who is drafted into the U.S. Army and can't seem to convince anyone that there's been a mistake. It's a brilliant piece of work, one that still has wonderful resonance today. (If you haven't seen the animated version, treat yourself on YouTube.)
Feiffer retired from editorial cartooning on a regular basis in 2000.
With our young again being victimized by a misguided military effort, it seemed a good time to pay homage to one of my greatest influences. "Munro, 2007," below, is the result. I think it works fine with no knowledge of the "Munro" back-story, and offers deeper meaning for those in the know (which now includes everyone reading this). I'm pretty tickled with this one.
An Iraq veteran's perspective When I volunteered as a soldier to be a part of the initial invasion of Iraq, it was under the assumption that our intentions were just. U.S. troops-most of us from working-class backgrounds-were fed countless stories of the supposed brutality of Saddam Hussein, and the plight of the Iraqi people.
I truly began to understand the nature of the "liberation" that the U.S. military was bringing to Iraq after one particular mission-one that I struggle with everyday, and one that I share with a great deal of shame and regret.
Three score ago, after a long history of service, superior, and yet segregated, Black soldiers were recognized as equal, or at least consideration for the possibility was put forth. In truth, then and perhaps now, manpower needs took precedence over racial prejudice in name only. The story begins on July 26, 1948, or perchance, years earlier. Historians speak of President Harry S. Truman's doctrine, Executive Order 9981. The directive states, "It is hereby declared to be the policy of the President that there shall be equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed services without regard to race, color, religion, or national origin." While the words are wondrous, the tale of what was and is, does not begin or end with this decree.
There is a story taking place in America that is being buried by the media, the armed forces, and the politicians. This story is so frightening that no one wants to address it or even talk about it. This story has the potential to bring more violence to the streets of America than any terrorist attack. The frightening tale that is being ignored is the fact that we have ticking time bombs within our midst. They do not belong to al Qaeda or any other shady terrorist cell, they will not be profiled because they don't have Mid-Eastern ancestry, nor are they Muslim extremists. These ticking time bombs are our own sons, daughters, fathers, and brothers. They are the returning soldiers from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
On this the day, the Fourth of July, we celebrate our own Independence. Citizens revel in our love of freedom and tranquility. Today, may we take a moment to reflect upon how an unwarranted, or unnecessary war might have a profound effect on our lives and those of all mankind throughout the globe.
I offer a correspondence intended for the person we hope will be our next President, Senator Barack Obama. Please ponder the possibilities, and if you choose, I invite you to add your signature. You fellow Americans appreciate your consideration.
We the undersigned may have different views on U.S. foreign policy with respect to Iran. We all, however, are deeply concerned about the stories in the press in the past few weeks suggesting that the Bush administration might be considering a military strike on Iran, that it might give a green light to such an attack by Israel, or that it might engage in other acts of war, such as imposing a blockade against Iran.
We welcomed your stand against the war on Iraq in 2002. And we were encouraged by your early campaign statements emphasizing diplomacy over military action against Iran. Today, you have an opportunity to forestall a repeat of the tragic Iraq war. We hope you will use that opportunity.
We agree with the conclusion of Muhammed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, that "A military strike ... would be worse than anything possible. It would turn the region into a fireball..." A military attack, he said, "will mean that Iran, if it is not already making nuclear weapons, will launch a crash course to build nuclear weapons with the blessing of all Iranians, even those in the West." (Reuters, June 20, 2008.)
We don't know, of course, whether an attack on Iran is in fact being considered, or if there are serious plans to initiate other acts of war, such as a blockade of the country. But we call on you to issue a public statement warning of the grave dangers that any of these actions would entail, and pointing out how inappropriate and undemocratic it would be for the Bush administration to undertake them, or encourage Israel to do so, in its closing months in office.
An attack on Iran would violate the UN Charter's prohibition against the use or threat of force and the Congress's authority to declare war. Moreover, the public right to decide should not be foreclosed by last-minute actions of the Bush administration, which will set U.S. policy in stone now.
We were heartened by your earlier comments suggesting that an Obama administration would act on the understanding that genuine security requires a willingness to talk without preconditions (something Iran has offered several times to no avail), and that threats and military action are counterproductive. We hope you will follow through on these commitments once in office, but also that you will speak out now against any acts of war by the Bush administration.
Sincerely,
Please review the list of signatories below or follow the path provided . . . Impressive!!!!!!!! Please join the signatories by traveling through this link
He was a beautiful bouncing baby boy. He was born to two parents that love him dearly. Even before his birth, indeed, prior to conception, this little fellow was the apple of his parent's eyes. His biological beginning was carefully calculated. As the seeds of life developed into a bright-eyed baby, the people he now knows as Mom and Dad thought of little else but Maxwell. The soon to be proud Papa and Momma anxiously anticipated the day they could hold this bundle of joy. Each of his parents was eager to meet and greet the small, sweet face of the guy that they would call Max. Maximum value, supreme significance, marvelously magnificent, all this was and would be their son. After Max was delivered and during any political season, such as this, Mom and Dad feel certain Max is issue number one.
Thank God for the Iraqis, if it were not for them the MSM would have allowed John McCain to put the Iraq War in his pocket and run with it. Fortunately the Iraqis have other thoughts and have reminded the American public that yes there is still a war going on in Iraq. Despite all the hype and the John McCain "Mission Accomplished" banners, any peace in Iraq has very little to do with us and the surge and is dependent on the Iraqi people. It is unfortunate that it takes bodies and bloodshed to get the MSM's attention, but of course when St. John declares peace is at hand who in the MSM is going to argue.
(Tis in the news once again. Our troops take their own lives.
During the month of January, more soldiers committed suicide (24) than were killed by enemy fire in Afghanistan and Iraq combined (16). This is unusual, but--amazingly--not unique. In fact, the problem of military suicides is growing much worse, as Army Chief of Staff George Casey said yesterday in Hawaii.
Casey claimed to be mystified by the suicide rates:
"The fact of the matter is, we just don't know" why suicides have increased, Army Chief of Staff Gen. George W. Casey Jr. said Friday. "It's been very frustrating to me with the effort that we made over the last year, and we did not stem the tide."
"Supporting the troops means more than slapping a bumper sticker on your car" ~ David Berry, 26, Iraq Veteran
They say the soldiers fight for our freedom, and while many may argue the truth of this statement, no one can dispute that we must support our troops. Today, citizens have a chance to demonstrate that we, the people care about those who serve our country in combat. Please reflect on a reality too terrible to ignore, soldier suicide. Then, if you choose telephone, or write, your Florida State Representative. Express your desire to endorse State Bill 2554, Prevention Services for Veterans and Their Families, submitted by Senator Ted Deutch. If you are not a Florida resident, please ponder what you can do within your home region. The tales and the tears of those torn from within tell an unforgettable story. Will we listen, and look for ways to help those hurt by our war?
In a "glowing" statement, perhaps meant to glorify the horrific deaths of the soldiers slain in Iraq, Vice President Dick Cheney offered, "I think it's a reminder of the extent to which we are blessed with families who've sacrificed as they have." The man who, in his youth sought five deferments in order to avoid service during the Vietnam War, went on to state, "A lot of men and women sign up because sometimes they will see developments." Richard B. Cheney helps us to recall the terror Americans felt as they witnessed the Twin Towers fall on September 11, 2001. He explains, this event and the thought of a terrorist threat "stimulated a lot of folks to volunteer for the military because they wanted to be involved in defending the country." "The thing that comes through loud and clear is how much they are committed to the cause, to doing what needs to be done to defend the nation," Cheney proclaimed. Yet, citizens cognizant of the reasons for a possible rise in recruitment remember more than a moment that changed the course of life for many young men and women.
Editorial columnist Bob Herbert of the New York Times wrote an interesting piece discussing the true cost of the Iraq War. According to a Nobel prize winning economist, Joseph Stiglitz and the vice chairman of Goldman Sachs International, Robert Hormats the Iraq War will cost at least 3 trillion dollars. This figure includes cost which are never reported by the media or discussed by politicians. The truth is that the cost of a war is more than the money spent on men and material, as if it were some business venture that can be tallied with a nice spreadsheet and budget. In today's world, war is packaged like a corporate enterprise complete with sanitized videos and reporting to make it more palatable to the disinterested masses.
Said Mr. Stiglitz: "Because the administration actually cut taxes as we went to war, when we were already running huge deficits, this war has, effectively, been entirely financed by deficits. The national debt has increased by some $2.5 trillion since the beginning of the war, and of this, almost $1 trillion is due directly to the war itself ... By 2017, we estimate that the national debt will have increased, just because of the war, by some $2 trillion." NY Times
Presidential aspirant Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks of her ample experience. The Senator from New York reminds us in advertisements and advisements that she, the former First Lady is abundantly qualified to serve as President of the world's superpower, the United States of America. For decades, Clinton gave to her country and the community. She would like to continue to work for the people; perhaps, in a more profound manner. As Hillary Clinton affirmed of herself, "I have crossed the Commander-In-Chief threshold." However, some question her qualifications.
Copyright 2007, Paul Kane. All rights reserved. Used by permission.
For the past few years the Bush administration in concert with Congress has led America down a path based on fear backed with little in terms of real facts. As the truth begins to be seen over time we find much of what we were assured was factual in nature was in honest truth distorted or fabricated in many instances. We, the people, were misled into a war of aggression in Iraq. Today we find our military stretched to the limits as the situation collapses before our eyes. Violence within the country continues with attacks against civilian populations on a near daily basis. American deaths are increasing and now exceed 3800. Death of and injury to military contractors are increasing in numbers, too, even though those numbers are not in the news these days.
This morning, as I approached the peace corner, two of my fellow demonstrators made mention of the soldiers across the street. Weekly, a throng of Iraq war dissenters stands and pickets on the south side of the street. I position myself on the North end of the avenue. I stand alone. On this afternoon, two young men dressed in Army fatigues, soldiers, situated themselves on the median, yards from where I position myself. They carried plastic bins; patriotic banners were pasted onto these containers. American flags and pamphlets graced their station. The military men collected money from passers-by. They distributed literature. They did their work from the same side of the street I favor.
Last night in a diary by Democratic Consultant there was mention of what must one do to really demonstrate support for the troops. The diary and the following discussion reminded me of an interaction at our weekly vigil last Saturday morning. Every week a local group of us stands in protest against the war. We do this on Friday night and again on Saturday morning. The group began the vigils even before the initial invasion of Iraq. I was privileged to join more than two years ago and have been a regular protester since that time.
They did not ask. He told. Stephen Benjamin was one of over 11,000-service member discharged from the military in the last fourteen years. These soldiers did not ask to be dismissed. Physically fit men and women were not released after being injured. These troops were not ill. Nor were they insubordinate. These select servicemen and women did not tire of their tour. Loyal military men and women were and are gay, not joyous, just not heterosexual.
At a time when our country is in dire need of trained professionals willing to serve in our armed forces, when America is looking for linguists able to speak Arabic fluently, many of those that speak the language have been dismissed on the grounds of gender preference. Our Department of Defense apparently believes those boys and girls that do not share conventional ?standards? or do not engage in ?acceptable? sexual relations must be banned from service.
Your speech at the First Baptist Church in Selma, Alabama moved me. The words, as written are glorious. I cried as I listened to the sentiments; "It matters." Yet, I am conflicted. The issues you mentioned are important. I trust you care for your countrymen and women. Those of color are no less significant to you than their white counterparts are. I believe you too work to defend the rights of the impoverished. Still, I struggle. I have done so for days. I meant to share my thoughts with you alone, for Hillary, you were the object of my renewed realization. However, finally, I recognized that I am not equating your contrary views to a personal biased bigotry. I am speaking to all Americans that think combat cures all or any ills. Thus, I publish this treatise, a letter to you, or perchance to all of us. I offer possibilities, probabilities that we all might wish to contemplate.
I offer this brief appeal for redress. In this treatise, I ask those of you that are able, veterans and active duty service men and women alike to express your angst. If you are against the war, please sign the petition below.
Many active duty, reserve, and guard service members are concerned about the war in Iraq and support the withdrawal of U.S. troops. The Appeal for Redress provides a way in which individual service members can appeal to their Congressional Representative and US Senators to urge an end to the U.S. military occupation. The Appeal messages will be delivered to members of Congress at the time of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Day in January 2007.
The wording of the Appeal for Redress is short and simple. It is patriotic and respectful in tone.
As a patriotic American proud to serve the nation in uniform, I respectfully urge my political leaders in Congress to support the prompt withdrawal of all American military forces and bases from Iraq . Staying in Iraq will not work and is not worth the price. It is time for U.S. troops to come home.
The Appeal for Redress is sponsored by active duty service members based in the Norfolk area and by a sponsoring committee of veterans and military family members. The Sponsoring committee consists of Iraq Veterans Against the War, Veterans For Peace, and Military Families Speak Out.
Members of the military have a legal right to communicate with their member of Congress. To learn more about the rights and restrictions that apply to service members click here.
Attorneys and counselors experienced in military law are available to help service members who need assistance in countering any attempts to suppress this communication with members of Congress.
Click here to send the Appeal to your elected representatives.
If you are for a withdrawal, you have company. Others still think we must stay.
The document was delivered and the debate begins. It is not a "discussion" or a "dialogue" that we are witnessing. It is as the Iraqi war was and still is, combative. Persons participating in the parsing do not desire diplomacy. Had they ever expressed such a desire, war would not have been an option. The exchanges we hear are attempts to win favor. As we read, we realize each individual and group wishes to be victorious. We are watching another war, the war of words.
Words are bantered about. Definitive statements of opinion are posed as news.
Subscribe to Site [RSS]
