I just watched the Frontline special, "A Company of Soldiers". It is an amazing documentary of a month spent with a squad of soldiers in Iraq during the month of November.

It can be watched online here: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/company/view/

As I watched the program, I felt I had entered a surreal world. The young GI's were able to create this fantasy of rationalized reality. They were the good guys no matter what they did. Somehow they seemed to forget, they invaded the country. They were the ones wearing rayban sunglasses as they bragged about running people off the road, shot at anyone too close to them, killed innocent civilians, shot up vehicles, threatened and bullied anyone as they wanted.

The military lingo was Orwellian as they labeled opposition as anti-iraqi forces instead of anti-american forces. And they couldn't understand how anyone could be so cowardly as to destroy a Bagdad Christian Church, as their fellow soldiers were leveling mosques in Falluja.

The narrowmindedness was astounding. The soldiers couldn't comprehend they would react just as the insurgents, if Iraqis invaded the US. One soldier wanted payback for his killed buddy. He didn't seem to realize that maybe Iraqis were killing them because the US invaded Iraq and have killed tens of thousand of Iraqis. No matter what the soldiers did, they were the good guys. It was absolutely surreal.

Sadly, one of the most powerful moments is when a soldier shoots and kills a dog. The anguish of the dog's owner is understandable by any human being. To their credit, many of the other soldiers were also disgusted.

At the rate we are creating enemies in Iraq, it is impossible to win. This is another Vietnam-or Algeria.

I can't blame too much on ignorant, 20-something year old soldiers. They are too young to think critically or questioningly. They are an unthinking product of their society just following orders. They try to make sense of nonsense-as one dies here and another is maimed there. However if you know any local neocons, you know-those individuals with tailored brown shirts deep in their closets and blood on their souls, thank them for America's next Vietnam.

So my point? Someone tell me why I am wrong???? Why isn't Iraq another Vietnam? After watching this documentary, I see the same elements in place.

Explain to me why and how we will win, instead of lose, after watching the alienation of the populace shown in this Frontline documentary?

Well, a couple things:

- Vietnam was a nation literally divided into two, and the Americans showed up in the middle of another war.
- The Vietnamese believed that they were fighting for independance.
- Religion wasn't much of a factor in Vietnam (save Tet), whereas Islam will always be a political factor in the Middle East (read Albert Hondouri's A History of the Arab People).

Little personal note: I've always said that young men shouldn't get a hold of guns. When i was living in Indonesia, i was held up by a couple of trigger-happy jackasses in the Indonesian military. There's absolutly nothing worse than an angry guy pointing a guy at you screaming in a language you don't understand. I do admire the American military, but i sure feel for the Iraqis.

I think our situation in Iraq is very similar to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. We may have a better outcome in Iraq than the Soviets did in Afghanistan. And we may not. Time will tell.

Meanwhile, Osama is still a free man. Saudi funded Madrassas all over the ME continue to graduate indoctrinated fanatics. The future looks very grim to me. But I'm not a stockholder in any military industries. If I stood to profit from Pentagon contracts, the future would be looking very bright indeed.

First I think they ought to give that guy a new dog. Then they should disarm that soldier and sic a schultzhund dog on him and allow it to bite him for a while because he would certainly deserve it. Obviously these people are very immature and trigger happy. That is to be expected though when you have the equivalent of Czar Peter the third in the white house playing army men, moving his little soldiers around with little care to their lives or the lives of the opposition. In truth WW1 was the last honorable war. No war since then has gone without unnecassary viiolence to civilians. There is also no more honor bacause it doesn't take much thought and you can't keep it between the two military forces. Now you can press a button and indescriminately wipe out a whole city. War has no honor anymore therefore those that fight it, though they should use dignity, have none because they blindly do what they are told.

Reading this thread was heart breaking, war seen as a game, life not being treasured,
anxiety, paranoia growing on both sides. US hasn't won the war on terror, nor helped Iraqis find freedom, nor reached democracy yet, what you have won is the "right" to take oil

whoever leads the country will do it in a fascist manner, money, oil and army being more important then lives

In the Koran, animals are animate piles of meat. Dogs are traditionally seen as unclean in many arab regions and the Hadith (the collection of sayings of Muhammad's closest followers that forms the spine of Islamic law) considers them wicked beasts. You are mandated to kill any that snaps at you.

Oh and by the way: Saddam Hussein was known as a boy for torturing and killing dogs with a heated steel bar.

This isn't a game of who hurt the dogs first. Just knock it off.

They use the Koran to justify their actions, so I see no reason why I can't do the same... at least to prove a point.

I suppose you use the bible literally to direct and justify your every action as well??

Or would such a blanket assumption based on the fact that you live in a Christian nation be a little presumptious--not to mention stupid?

You can think what you want about the war, but these soldiers are brave enough to risk their lives for their country, and it's an enormously difficult and scary job, why shouldn't they see the people trying to kill them as the enemy? Why shouldn't they protect themselves? Mistakes are made in war, its chaos and confusion, no one can make perfect decisions every time in such a situation. They also made friends with some Iraqis. It's not their fault that it was a bad decision to go there, but now we can't just leave the country alone until a new government is established.

We don't have to win in Iraq, we just have to keep order until the Iraqis can do it themselves.

However if you know any local neocons, you know-those individuals with tailored brown shirts deep in their closets and blood on their souls, thank them for America's next Vietnam.

I don't blame the soldiers too much. They are just kids and most don't have any choice about being over there. Of course, some of them are really ugly types. But they would be ugly whether they were in or out of the army.

I do blame the neocons and their sofa warrier supporters.

In his book On Guerrilla Wafare, Mao states that all troops need political training. Of course, he means propaganda, but i think he's on to something. Better education makes a better soldier. Of course, then they'd question the war in the first place . . .

but those who were more convinced about the war would fight harder and risk their lives to win it, not just call an airstrike on an entire block if you get hit by a stray friendly bullet

Exactly. And they'll think about the civilians before, say, shooting up dogs or cars. If they understood Arab culture and values, they'd help themselves out a lot.

In the Koran, animals are animate piles of meat. Dogs are traditionally seen as unclean in many arab regions and the Hadith (the collection of sayings of Muhammad's closest followers that forms the spine of Islamic law) considers them wicked beasts. You are mandated to kill any that snaps at you.

I find it interesting that when I watch the news I don't see turbins, beards and burka in Iraq. Clockwood, you are a victim of our administrations attempt to paint the Iraq invasion as part of the war on terror. The Iraqi people lived under a secular regime, and they were quite prosperous compared to many of their ME neighbors. These were people who were intelligent, and well capable of loving a dog no matter what the Qumran said about it. I don't suppose you would feel the same way if an Iraqi shot your dog and then quoted a verse from the bible that supports his right to do so? Perhaps something about beasts being here for man to rule over or some such bull.

If you haven’t got the critical capacity to realize that the Iraqi people are not the same as, certain cave dwelling fanatics then you really aught not comment on threads about the war.

If my dog was barking and snapping at a soldier, I would feel guilty. It would have been my stupidity that had the dog there when there was a soldier right there. It would have been by stupidity that had made me not train the dog to sit and stay on command and be nice around strangers.

I would expect anyone with a gun to shoot a dog that jumps at and snarls at them. This could be a local cop, an American soldier, or anyone.

The dog was shot in broad daylight. The dog wasn't near anyone. The dog was just barking. Even some of the other soldiers were disgusted. It is right there on film. You see the dog getting shot and there isn't anyone near the dog. How can you defend that action???

But obviously, some people, just like the soldiers on the film, can defend and rationalize anything, from murder, to theft, to shooting a dog in cold blood.

That is what is so weird about Bush, the neocons and their supporters. They can do no wrong. Whatever they do, is their victim's fault.

Regular everyday murderers and thieves often blame their victims. But murderers and theives are often psychopaths too.

If my dog was barking and snapping at a soldier, I would feel guilty. It would have been my stupidity that had the dog there when there was a soldier right there. It would have been by stupidity that had made me not train the dog to sit and stay on command and be nice around strangers.

Intelectual dishonesty, or cognitave dissonance? Dosn't that always seem to be the question when dealing with the right?

http://www.apa.org/books/4318830s.html

The narrowmindedness was astounding.
As is the narrowmindedness in your horrible abortion of a post.

I watched it last week, and while I love Frontline anyway (it is the only show I schedule into my week to ensure I catch it) this episode simply blew my socks off. It was amazing, and as good if not better than their recount of the early parts of the war (the offensive campaign). If any of you have not yet seen it, please go watch it right this minute.

Here's the rub. I draw a completely different conclusion than you. The soldiers documented therein are a fair sample of the United States military as a whole - young, motivated, with noble intent, in a tough situation. They don't care about the war, the politics, the corruption, the bad decisions made in the halls of government, the sanctimonious protesters who have no idea what their job entails. The soldiers are there to do a job; nothing more. And it's a dirty job. Probably the dirtiest in the world. Yet they will answer the call, they will pick up the mantle, and they will do their nation's bidding not because they want to fight or want to kill (do not believe the war movies; no soldier wants to kill) but because they are bound by their ties to their brothers in arms and would never think of abandoning them on the field of battle.

It is both hilarious and disgusting that you can have such an arrogant and cavalier attitude toward their behavior from the comfort of your computer chair, and your horribly flawed perception only underscores your ignorance on this subject. This is something I do not expect you to understand, and no amount of further explanation on my part will educate you. The only way to truly appreciate what these young men are enduring is for you to serve in the military yourself. To experience the sacrifice, the hardship, the joy, the cameraderie, the honor, the terror and the sorrow that conflate into a typhoon of emotion that permeates your mind during battle. These are emotions so powerful that they transcend words, and in all my years I have never been able to fully articulate what it is like to serve in a combat unit to anybody who has never been there. Until you do, you have nothing to stand on. Sit your ass down in the cheap seats and stick to things you possess a modicum of authority over, because posts like this make you look rather silly.

You have a lot to learn.

The soldiers documented therein are a fair sample of the United States military as a whole - young, motivated, with noble intent, in a tough situation. They don't care about the war, the politics, the corruption, the bad decisions made in the halls of government, the sanctimonious protesters who have no idea what their job entails. The soldiers are there to do a job; nothing more. And it's a dirty job. Probably the dirtiest in the world. Yet they will answer the call, they will pick up the mantle, and they will do their nation's bidding not because they want to fight or want to kill (do not believe the war movies; no soldier wants to kill) but because they are bound by their ties to their brothers in arms - because it's the right thing to do.

Please realize that this is true of every organized military in the world. Saying that they are loyal to their nation or their combat unit is not a statement of their morality. I wish to avoid Godwin’s law. Every nation with an organized military has had such men, regardless of the morality of the nations actions.

If all it takes to make a war moral is a national food like apple pie, a waving flag, and your buddy next to you (in a purely platonic capacity) then what shouldn't our army do? You owe jagger an apology for insulting him and then completely dodging the issue at hand.

Until you do, you have nothing to stand on. Sit your ass down in the cheap seats and stick to things you possess a modicum of authority over, because posts like this make you look rather silly.

I am an ex-military officer and I was in the first Gulf War. I believe you are the one talking of what you don't know.

And that is the reason I am not too hard on the soldiers. They are just ignorant kids.

I am very hard on the neocons and their supporters. If we invade a country and start killing people, we had better have a very damn good reason. We didn't and we don't. The neocons have still not given us a plausible reason why we invaded that country.

I may be an ex-military officer but I am not mindless nor stupid.

PS: An acquaintance of mine, army Captain, came back from Afghanistan a few months back. He was training Afghani soldiers over there. He said he felt like he was training the very people that would shoot him in the back if they had half a chance. He is doing everything he can to ensure he doesn't go back anywhere over there. He said it is senseless.

My brother is still in the military. He is a Lt. Colonel. He is far more conservative than I am, but like me, he is disgusted with what is going on. There are a lot of folks in the military that feel we have been lied to and people are dying for god knows what real reason.

Check out Hackworth as well.

The military has its bloody thirsty neocons for sure. But there are a lot of disgusted military people out there as well.

Fight over. KO. Jagger wins.

Also PS: Jagger, just out of curiosity, what unit did you serve with?

They don't care about the war, the politics, the corruption, the bad decisions made in the halls of government, the sanctimonious protesters who have no idea what their job entails. The soldiers are there to do a job; nothing more.

That’s exactly the problem isn’t it? Collective ignorance so that they don’t fell guilty about their immoral actions. The mentality you are espousing as a good thing really isn’t because it reinforces what makes militaries so bad, blindness. Now I believe that there are wars that justified, and have to be fought no question. But soldiers lives are on the line (are they not?) and limiting if not totally debasing these people’s opinions and beliefs is part of the military indoctrination programme. What the president says is right, period attitude. Although I don’t agree with you that protesters know nothing, chances are they know much more then the soldiers fighting, the soldiers should start asking themselves serious questions. Let’s face it, the war in Iraq isn’t America’s war, its Bush’s war. What I fear is that the US military is turning to some Soviet like machine, which instead of fighting for country, its fighting for party. I wonder…how credible would a Democratic president would be in the halls of the military, and the barracks?

Crimson, I don't release anything private over the internet any longer. However if you want to know, drop me a private message.

I am an ex-military officer and I was in the first Gulf War. I believe you are the one talking of what you don't know.

And that is the reason I am not too hard on the soldiers. They are just ignorant kids.

I am very hard on the neocons and their supporters. If we invade a country and start killing people, we had better have a very damn good reason. We didn't and we don't. The neocons have still not given us a plausible reason why we invaded that country.

I may be an ex-military officer but I am not mindless nor stupid.
In that case you are being just plain disingenuous by feigning righteous indignation at the soldiers' emotions, perspective biases, and desire to avenge their fallen brothers. You of all people should know that the politics, adversarial state of mind, or any other aspect that's handily discussed back home doesn't mean shit to them. All that matters is the men next to them.

I know there is a lot more closeted dissent in the military than some people like to admit because I was part of it myself. It also doesn't take a genius to see that some of the micromanaging horseshit being handed down from Washington does not bode well for the welfare or potency of our fighting men and women. On these things I imagine you and I could share some rather constructive discourse.

Anyway, sorry for getting all hot and bothered at you back there but this tends to be one of the few things that can get me riled up. The cultural rift between civilian life and the military is a yawning gulf of disparity, and there is a poor understand of what it means to serve by people who have never worn the uniform themselves.

They use the Koran to justify their actions, so I see no reason why I can't do the same... at least to prove a point.




Dogs are mentioned in the Koran 5 times and nowhere are they called unclean....only fake Hadiths by Abu Hurayra who hated dogs and women

Its real enough for the larger chunk of islamic law to be based on it. I don't care if it was written by Dr. Seuss.

Its real enough for the larger chunk of islamic law to be based on it. I don't care if it was written by Dr. Seuss.

Thats right wood, dodge my point about your being willfully ignorant of the distinction between islamic fanatics and the Iraqi people.

Don't act all high and mighty, Spymoose, that bastard disserved everything he got, and more, for wearing that towel on his head like some kind of idiot! Remember, if we simply refuse to acknowledge any wrong doing, then no wrong can be done! The Iraqis are uniformly evil, except when we do nice things for them and can gloat about helping to rebuild schools and stuff, otherwise they are vile wretches who need to bow down to American Supermen who are inerrant in their every action.

It's an awfully ungrateful sentiment to be angry about someone shooting your dog when that person could have just as easily blown a hole right through your wall and raped your wife. The nerve of these Iraqi people is simply outstanding. They bring this treatment on themselves!

I presented two arguements. The first applies if he is a sane, secular Iraqi citizen and the second applies if he is an Islamist nutter. Take your pick.

Number two should also take care of any of the islamist organizations or governments complaining.

I presented two arguements. The first applies if he is a sane, secular Iraqi citizen and the second applies if he is an Islamist nutter. Take your pick.

Yes, however they are both arguments as to why it is ok for a member of an occupying force to shoot, in cold blood, a dog which belongs to a member of the civilian population which they are apparently supposed to be protecting.

I truly hope that somewhere in your twisted struggling mind you can understand how such an act is simply intolerable and just flat out wrong. If not, then perhaps I'll come over to your place, build a shed for your neighbor, and then shoot your dog and see if perhaps you feel a bit upset over the matter when all is said and done.

Its real enough for the larger chunk of islamic law to be based on it. I don't care if it was written by Dr. Seuss.



What Islamic law? you post things about Islamic law as if you know what your talking about which you obviously dont.Perhaps you should do your homework before you post

Who the fuck cares about one damn dog? It was stupid to shoot it, one inexperienced medic panicked, but it pales in comparison to all the murder and human bloodshed and misery going on there. They are allowed to shoot people if they see a weapon, or they are driving too fast towards them, or if they are in the company of someone carrying a weapon (remember the helicopter video?). When in doubt, your life is worth more than a civilian, they do not recieve the benefit of the doubt. War is a very blunt instrument, and these kind of things are expected, that's why war should only be made when absolutely necessary, and when all other avenues of diplomacy are exhausted.

I presented two arguements. The first applies if he is a sane, secular Iraqi citizen and the second applies if he is an Islamist nutter. Take your pick.

Well you choose the worst…the Republicans…eerie!

Undecided, your debating skills are impeccable. And exactly what are you undecided about?