PGHIMC - Pittsburgh Independent Media Center

Pittsburgh Man in War on Terror in Afghanistan
by Caleb "Shooter" Schaber Sunday, Jan. 15, 2006 at 5:22 AM
editor@nvnewswire.com (email address validated) 775-557-2200 PO Box 111, Gerlach, nv 89412

Spc. Eric Abes is a US Army soldier fighting the war on terror in Kandahar, Afghanistan.

abes.jpg, image/jpeg, 2048x1536

DASHT-I-MARGO, Afghanistan


The Red Desert in Southern Afghanistan borders Pakistan. The locals call it Dasht-i-Margo—Desert of Death.


“If you are driving that thing at night, you have a pretty good reason for doing it,” said Capt. Jeremy Turner, 30, Company Commander of the Delta Company, 2nd Battalion, 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment, 82nd Airborne Division attached in Afghanistan to Task Force 3rd of the 319th Airborne field Artillery Regiment (the Gun Devils). Turner's Company was commonly called Team Delta.


During a five day mission, Turner lead four platoons in and out of the Red Desert and surrounding villages.


Team Delta searched for Taliban returning from Pakistan after the Moslem Holiday of Eid. The Night ambushes were set at several routes the Taliban use as crossings from Pakistan to Afghanistan. Temperatures often hovered just above freezing.


Team Delta are based at Kandahar Airfield (KAF.) Each platoon left in a separate convoy from KAF, winding through Kandahar. Dirt rests in the spaces between roads and buildings where sidewalks should be. Trash and urban debris blow everywhere. Evidence of war was visible on every block, no matter how busy or prosperous.


The convoy passed through a seemingly endless bazaar filled with venders of commerce and desire. Colorful fruit markets and stalls with hanging sides of unrefrigerated meat crowded the shops on the dirt sidewalk.


“None of this was here when we got here,” Turner said. “No one was out here.”


The city of Kandahar has nearly doubled in size since April, when Team Delta arrived, he said.


The inside of Turner's armored Humvee contained a jumble of weapons, communication and computerized navigational equipment. Riding behind the thick, bullet proof windows gave it a feeling of a submarine's interior.


“We don't have to worry about being popped in the city,” explained Turner. “The further out we get, the worse it gets.”


On top of Turner's armored Humvee rests a machine gun. Spc. Eric Abes, 28, from Pittsburgh, Pa. worked as the gunner on this mission, as he usually does, standing with half his body out of the truck in the M-240 gun turret.


Abes was deployed to Iraq previously, and has been to Afghanistan once before as a soldier.


“I've done something that matters,” he said. “Stamping out the forces of evil.”


He joked that his deployments should be getting safer and easier. This time, he has been in more combat than his two previous deployments, he said.


After making a short stop at an Afghan National Army (ANA) compound called the 530th to pick additional ANA troops for the mission, Team Delta left the pavement and headed into the desert. They past a number of cemeteries as they left the 530th. The Afghani's pile rocks over the dead and do not bury them. The graves are oriented so that the dead are facing mecca.


By dusk, all four platoons were in their designated locations. The smell of marijuana plants filled the air. Opium and marijuana are still grown by many farmers in Afghanistan. When Team Delta intercept a drug trafficker, they are turned over to the ANP for arrest. But the main objective was neutralizing insurgents, not drug enforcement.


Turner's first catch that evening was a family riding back on a tractor with a large load of brush in a trailer. The farmer driving the tractor explained, through the interpretor that traveled with Turner, that he was tired, and was returning to his nearby village from the desert after gathering wood.


“No more American's will bother you tonight,” Turner told the farmer, after a short inspection. Unfortunately, this farmer's tractor did not start. Team Delta helped him get it started and farmer and his family rode off into the darkness. Before he left, the farmer disclosed that he saw two Toyota land cruisers transporting opium while he was in the desert.


Later, Turner and the platoon he was traveling with moved to another location for the night. The soldiers took turns on guard duty through night, watching for anyone crossing the desert.


At dawn, looking into the mirrors of their Humvees, the men shaved in the cold morning air. After a quick breakfast of Meals Ready to Eat (MRE), Team Delta packed up and rolled to another ANA compound called Papa Zulu where Turner needed to meet with some local officials. Team Delta rested.


While at Papa Zulu, Abes revealed that he liked to read on his down time, but confessed that it is usually “mind numbing” stuff like Tom Clancy.


“I'm not your typical military guy,” he said.


Abes said he came from a very liberal, upper middle class Jewish family in Pittsburgh, who have strong convictions against the military and war.


“Three months before I joined the army, if you told me that I was joining, I'd tell you that you were smoking crack,” he said.


For the next few days, Team Delta crisscrossed the desert in a similar pattern. One night, a complete white out of dust was followed by a rain storm.


“In three deployments, this is my first dust storm,” Abes said.


The platoons traversed a labyrinth of mud walls, fields and ditches along the treacherous country side as they changed locations daily.


Abes was required to look for roads that would lead the convoy to its destination when the trail the convoy was traveling on appeared to end. The elevation gave him a better vantage point in the turret, but he also had to endure the sun, rain and clouds of dust.


Navigating the nameless dirt roads with a caravan of armored and fully packed Humvees, through villages that have not changed their ways of living since the time of the Bible was no easy feat. With throats choked on dust even on the inside of the Humvees, Team Delta ran these bumpy one lane roads with a purpose and destination. Miles of mud brick walls lined these roads, and towered over even the gunners. Often turning a blind corner revealed the road was filled with sheep, goats or camels. On at least two occasions, a truck was stuck crossing step, muddy drainage ditches blocking the roads.


The older men in these small villages stood stoically outside their compounds, watching the convoy pass. Other times, Team Delta became family entertainment. Children surrounded the troops, especially when they got stuck. Mostly the Afghani children liked Team Delta, waved at them or gave the thumbs up. But at least two threw fruit, or rocks.


Although no Taliban were captured, Turner still considered the mission a success.


“Every time we go out even if we don't get the “master guy,” we learn more about the people, the enemy and the area of operations,” said Turner. “It makes us more effective.”


During the mission, one Humvee was destroyed by an IED attack. Insurgents mounted four separate attacks with small arms from concealed positions. The attacks were brief and the insurgents fled quickly. Other than partial hearing loss from the IED attack, no one in Team Delta was injured.


“They wanted to 'get their jihad on us,'” said Turner, “but they were scared and shot from where no one could see them.”


This war has a personal meaning for Abes.


“I was in basic training on Sept. 11th,” he said. “I came into a peace time army and all the sudden we are at war.”


Abes said he had friends in New York City and Washington D.C., and feels that fighting this war is a way he personally keeps his friends safe. Abes agreed with the invasion of Iraq.


“We should go every where there is a son of bitch abusing people,” he said. However, he added: “You do one thing very well, then you move on.”


A few months after Team Delta return from this deployment, Abes's time in the military is up. He is not reenlisting and plans on finishing his bachelors degree in political science with his GI Bill.


“I did my time for king and country,” he said.

Abes is grew up in Squirrel Hill, PA.

nvnewswire.com

Crossing a mud pit in Southern Afghanistan
by Caleb "Shooter" Schaber Sunday, Jan. 15, 2006 at 5:22 AM
editor@nvnewswire.com 775-557-2200 PO Box 111, Gerlach, nv 89412

hmvwat.jpg, image/jpeg, 2048x1536

This was part of Spc. Abes convoy.

nvnewswire.com

Graves
by Caleb "Shooter" Schaber Sunday, Jan. 15, 2006 at 5:22 AM
editor@nvnewswire.com 775-557-2200 PO Box 111, Gerlach, nv 89412

graves.jpg, image/jpeg, 2048x918

This is an Afghan grave yard. The dead must be buried within 3 days of their death, and they lay facing Mecca.

nvnewswire.com

Kuchi
by Caleb "Shooter" Schaber Sunday, Jan. 15, 2006 at 5:22 AM
editor@nvnewswire.com 775-557-2200 PO Box 111, Gerlach, nv 89412

fle.jpg, image/jpeg, 2048x1536

Spc. Abes observes a tribe of Kuchi, nomadic people of Afghanistan.

nvnewswire.com

Afghan Children
by Caleb "Shooter" Schaber Sunday, Jan. 15, 2006 at 5:22 AM
editor@nvnewswire.com 775-557-2200 PO Box 111, Gerlach, nv 89412

dscn3262.jpg, image/jpeg, 2048x1536

Some children observing the US Troops

nvnewswire.com

If fighting terrorists was your goal, you could have stayed stateside . . .
by rm86 Sunday, Jan. 15, 2006 at 6:21 AM

If fighting terrorists was your goal, you could have stayed stateside and focused your efforts on Washington, D.C.

You obviously don't know what the word terrorist means, because if you did you'd realize how perversely backward your claims of fighting a war on terror are.

I take the reference that Abes hails from a liberal Jewish family as being an indictment of liberal Jews. Not your intent, I trust.

Here's a thought: to be on the safe side, either stop invoking ethnic identity and political affiliation as if they were a proxy for virtue, or let's all start owning up to the immense historical wrongs committed by our respective forebears and let the rest of the world decide whether those crimes indeed prove our moral superiority.

Someone as misinformed as you has no business wielding a gun. Seriously. Please put down your weapon and come home. Thanks.

ERIC'S DAD
by ED ABES Sunday, Jan. 15, 2006 at 10:57 AM
eja@abesbaumann.com

I'm Eric's Dad.Eric thinks things thru before acting. He has a mind of his own.He always marched to a different drummer & always will. He says what he thinks, but is very willing to consider all viewpoints. He has a heart of gold, but follows his head as well.He knows that there is a difference in what our government does from their stated reasoning for doing so. The planning in the details was not there. His first tour in Afghanistan was in an unarmored hmvee. They had to sandbag the floor. He is on his second tour there w/Iraq in between. I don't want to endanger his well being by saying anything more. Suffice it to say that off the record he has a lot of other thoughts on what is going on. Too bad he's not in more of a leadership position. Or policy making for that matter. I've never been prouder of anyone than I am of him.

Osama
by Milt May Monday, Jan. 16, 2006 at 10:42 PM

"If fighting terrorists was your goal, you could have stayed stateside and focused your efforts on Washington, D.C.

You obviously don't know what the word terrorist means, because if you did you'd realize how perversely backward your claims of fighting a war on terror are. "

While I'm sure you are impressing your 13 year old buddies with your abilities to harass Starbucks employees, you are displaying the reasoning powers of a fucking sack full of hammers. Are you really this incredibly fucking stupid? Do you prefer the taste of Taliban cock you simpering piece of shit?

Thanks, Eric
by Junkie Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006 at 1:03 PM

If the US wasn't there to regulate the Afghan opium trade, I don't know what we'd do.
The Taliban also deserve the 2005 comeback of the year.

Milt ...a moron
by JM Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2006 at 7:42 PM

Milt, your are wrong, in both the tone of your argument and your insults to the soldier. Is it you think you are some educated (immature) elite on a Bush-bashing crusade, with the grammar of a truly crude, vulgar punk? Or are you really crude and dumb? Either way, your words demonstrate that freedom of speach is still a good thing, but that some people are truly sad, miserable, little men.

Great work Eric. As we say, even hateful, ignorant buffoons sleep peacefully at night because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Hate the war, love the soldier. Airborne!

Talk Radio Programs Morons
by G. Orwell Wednesday, Jan. 18, 2006 at 12:11 PM

I love it when little crypto-fascists, just like the ones I fought in Spain, paraphrase me out of context.

"As we say, even hateful, ignorant buffoons sleep peacefully at night because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
Sean Hannity didn't come up with that statement.
It's funny that the jackboot set is so quick to quote an old Trot like myself.

One of Eric's NYC friends
by Bex Thursday, Jan. 19, 2006 at 6:02 PM

As one of the NYC friends Eric makes mention of in the article, I take personal offense to RM86's post. Yes, free speech is one of our basic freedoms and I am not offended by your need to express your comments, but I think you are attacking the person behind the article entirely too much. Rather than doing that, I feel maybe you should be putting those words towards the policy makers who set these things in motion. Talk away, feel free to do so, but by no means should you attack the people that were sent to places like this, because they are a part of something so much bigger than themselves.

Like, JM said, Hate the war; love the soldier.

Keep the nasty personal comments to yourself.

Better Yet
by pjd Friday, Jan. 20, 2006 at 3:16 PM

This article was published to provoke a response. Don't feed the trolls. The best response to this article is no response.

However, I do have problems with "hate the war; love the soldier" perspective. The problem with this statement is that it separates the soldiers from their personal responsibility for their immoral actions. It also, indirectly insults the soldiers themselves since it implies they are too dumb to know why they are fighting. Most US solders know very well why they are fighting - to support the US domination over the world's people, and they fully, voluntarily, support this mission.

I should have followed my own advice...
by pjd Friday, Jan. 20, 2006 at 4:56 PM

Sorry everyone, should have followed my own advice. While every cell im my brain screams rebuttal (the troll didn't address a single point I made!) I won't feed the trolls this time- especially the ones from out-of-town.

My fellow patriots
by rm86 Friday, Jan. 20, 2006 at 11:01 PM

My fellow patriots:

The thrust of my original post, which almost all of you ignored, was that: (a) the U.S. government engages in and promotes terrorism to an extent unmatched in the world; (b) U.S. soldiers who fail to understand the previous point are making the world more dangerous, not less, while those who agree with the point have no business fighting; (c) the world will not become less dangerous until all U.S. soldiers suspend the supposed war on terror and come home; (d) ethnic identity doesn’t earn you a pass when it comes to questions of moral conduct.

If you want to respond substantively, try coming up with a principled definition for terrorism that doesn’t lead to point (a), above. Here’s some added incentive: I know that you’ll fail, but even still, I have to think that my words echoing around your brain will be all the motivation you’ll ever need to try your very, albeit futile, best.

On to your individual comments–


Ed:


Sorry, but I lived through Vietnam, and a lot of other stuff before and after. It’s fine if your son wants to take responsibility for his actions as a soldier, regardless of the “support” or lack thereof of the American people. But people cross a line when they start trafficking in lethal force without absolute necessity for doing so, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the decade of “sanctions” that preceded them were all unnecessary and illegal (not to mention the cause and setting of atrocities and crimes against humanity too numerous to recount). Eric has, with the help of the U.S. government, placed himself on the other side of the line, which means that until he crosses back over, he has abandoned any claim for support by Americans who oppose this war. Period. If he were my kid, I’d pray that he’d come back whatever the consequences (including military prison and a dishonorable discharge), and gladly and gratefully support him until he was on his feet again. That said, I wouldn’t want to carry the burdens that you are carrying right now. I do hope your son comes home, today, before he harms anyone, including himself, and before anyone has a chance to do any harm to him. I also hope that he renounces any participation in any future preemptive war or war of aggression. Nothing that my own son could ever do would make me prouder than that.


Also, you say he has a heart of gold. It’s a nice sentiment, but a heart of gold for whom, Americans? Christian Fundamentalists? Jewish Liberals? What about the multitudes of impoverished Muslim kids and families who were wiped out in any one of the thousands of “air strikes,” artillery attacks, and house-to-house raids in the so-called War on Terror? Where was his heart of gold then? If he didn’t participate in any of these acts, he has provided and continues to provide essential support to, and participate with, the system that carried out these attacks against non-combatants. Either he has a heart of gold for everyone, or he doesn’t have a heart of gold.

To Bex:

The hate-the-war-love-the-soldier bullshit was exposed in all of its wretched fallaciousness at Nuremburg. “I was only following orders” is a legal excuse, and rarely a good one . You, however, have confused it for a moral excuse, which it most certainly is not. Indeed, it’s hard to think of a more depressing aspect of the current pro-war climate than the fact that, despite the experiences of 20th Century European Jews, Americans still have to be reminded of this simple point. You cannot separate the actor from the moral consequences of his or her intentional act. Period.


Also, you seem like such a fan of the “support the troops” mantra, but tell me, just how does one “support” the men and women in uniform? Doesn’t it strike you as odd that your leaders demand that the question be answered, chiefly if not solely, in the negative? It’s what you don’t do that matters. Don’t wonder. Don’t ask questions. Don’t investigate. And whatever you do, for God’s sake don’t criticize.


This should sound familiar, assuming you weren’t sleeping through your high school history class. Perhaps you’re familiar with the concept of attempting to end debate by accusing the other side of disloyalty. It’s called McCarthyism, and most of the posters in this thread owe a heavy debt indeed to the junior senator from Wisconsin.


Also, there’s an aspect of McCarthyism that transcends its use as a rhetorical device, and you’d do well to reflect upon it. McCarthy and his fellow-travelers were not just misguided patriots; they were also the greatest cowards of their generation. It wasn’t just that they were afraid of the facts. They were most frightened of where the fact might lead. Maybe, just maybe, corporate coopting of democracy wasn’t such a good idea after all; maybe communism wasn’t a monolithic conspiracy bent on world domination, but an almost predictable reaction to centuries of brutal capitalist colonization and oppression; maybe there were better ways of demonstrating our essential humanity than by dropping more bombs on a peasant Southeast Asian country in the 1960s and 1970s than were dropped by all sides, combined, during World War II. But if you dared questioned the prevailing wisdom that screamed against these notions, you suddenly found yourself marked as a traitor, and being treated as if you had forfeited your citizenship.


And that is precisely the same point that McCarthy’s descendants have made in their comments to my post.


Either you trust and believe in the ability of your fellow citizens to reach the correct decision after sorting through all of the relevant facts, or you don’t, in which case you’ll try anything, deception, intimidation, ridicule, whatever, to keep people from ever considering the other side’s point of view.


When you’ve figured out which side you’re on, Bex, please drop us a line.

Finally, To Milt, JM, Well Said, and Nessie:

Well what do you know, pets that can type (spelling, apparently, is another matter entirely). Your collective owners must be proud, for they trained you well. Let’s see if I can guess your breeds . . . Miniature Airhead? Shortbrain Terrier? A mix of the two, perhaps?

Look, why don’t you save your attacks for Rep. John Murtha, the Vietnam veteran who now recommends that young people NOT enlist in the U.S. military. Murtha’s message, in other words, is that if you sign up now and get iced, your death will have been IN VAIN.

Yeah, Rep. Murtha is just the kind of guy who could stand a good lecturing on courage from bravehearts like you. After all, what’s more courageous than ignoring the facts, mocking history, and hurling one childish insult after another?

When you get tired of sniffing each others butts, do feel welcome to give us all another taste of your pretend intellects.

Response to Mr. RM86
by CPT Turner Sunday, Jan. 22, 2006 at 10:31 AM
jeremy_turner51@yahoo.com N/A N/A

Mr. RM86,

Though I realize the ultimate futility of writing a response to your post, I will do so. I will admit that upon my initial reading I was surprised to read a logically flowing and humorous argument. Though I fundamentally believe your opinions are fatally flawed due to there being nearly completely devoid of fact and general lack of specificity, I was encouraged that someone of the opposing viewpoint had decided to attempt to rise above the bumper sticker explanations so increasingly common.

First, let me begin with where I agree with you. In fact, I would fully agree that ethnic identity doesn’t earn anyone a pass when it comes to questions of moral conduct. Anyone who argues to the contrary is clearly mistaken. I believe the journalist was simply attempting to illustrate an ironic fact or a perceived rarity in the ongoing war. Nonetheless, ethnic identity is really an irrelevant point.

My reluctance to respond argumentatively is because it has been my experience that when an individual has invested a great deal of time and energy in a certain viewpoint, that person rarely seems to acknowledge an opposing point outside of the context of their own arguments. Having said that…here goes nothing…

As I have stated you have made your previous point aptly, but then you seemed to counter it with your argument that we should all, “start owning up to the immense historical wrongs committed by our respective forebears.” I would politely contend that each of us on this earth live as individuals. Each solely responsible for his or her own actions. This is a generally accepted fact present within each of the worlds major religions and philosophies. Even considering the philosophies such as that of Confucius, which tend to carry a more societal context, no one has ever seriously denied that every single individual endures a unique and distinctive life. As such each person is held responsible for his or her own decisions right or wrong and those decisions solely. I, dear sir, am not responsible for slavery simply because my DNA is that of a Caucasian. Nor am I responsible for the slaying of Native Americans, just as I am not responsible for Enron stealing money from people because I have, yes on occasion, driven a car. Sorry, but I am afraid I can’t apologize with real conviction. As for allowing the rest of the world to “judge” us, do you seriously believe that Americans have sole proprietorship on being misinformed? What is even the value of such a judgment?


As you have so eloquently proposed, it is necessary to define terrorism. Though we could go down a list of different techniques and procedures one would commonly identify as terrorism I suspect we will likely have different views on this subject. Put simply my position is as follows: Terrorism is the deliberate targeting of civilians for purposes of attempting to cause another actor to change their position. Whether that actor be a nation-state, population, government, organization, individual citizen or even multinational corporation is essentially irrelevant. Terrorist acts target civilians either indiscriminately and/or maliciously causing them pain, despair, or death. Terrorism in its essence acts as a technique to achieve an aim by a conscious entity to impose its will on another entity. Though this point is albeit subtle, terrorist acts differentiate from criminal acts in that they deliberately target an innocent body for purposes of a perceived rational policy by the perpetrator and his masters.

With such a definition in mind, I fail to see how our government has done such a thing. I would appreciate if you would please specify how, “(a) the U.S. government engages in and promotes terrorism to an extent unmatched in the world.” I find this hard to believe.

Certainly you are not arguing that the spread of democracy or our “culture” or for that matter even the spread of Pepsi Company rises to the extent of the deliberate killing of Afghan fathers or the raping of pre-teen daughters in order to get villages and tribes to bend to the will of the Taliban leaders? I am at a loss as to how the U.S. government is administering policies which meet the level of bombs on buses to kill school children. Are those policies developed in a secret corner of the Department of Commerce and I just don’t know about it? Perhaps McCarthy has a clandestine secret organization down in the basement of the Department of Health and Human Services still cranking out the virtues of capitalism with the intent to terrorize the innocent citizens of Mr. Chavez’s Venezuela. Forgive me for my sarcasm but I find your discussion in this arena sophomoric. Sure our government is not perfect, but you seem to believe that it is the equivalent of a fundamentalist or totalitarian terrorist state.

In response to your argument that McCarthy and his ilk were “the greatest cowards of their generation.” I am by no means a McCarthy protector, but should we not at least consider the effects Stalin had on the Soviet Union just prior to the McCarthy era. Further, do we not have an inherent duty to our fellow man to judge the good and bad of other regimes the world over on their own merits and not within a supposed framework of conspiracy? Even if I were to consider that Adam Smith’s capitalism and Jeffersonian democracy are the true corrupting agents of totalitarian regimes (I do not by the way), I still find your apologetic views on communism somewhat disturbing. And while I can appreciate a certain degree of introspection on our own house, it would seem that your criticism of the United States is such to a point that it impairs your ability to observe and understand the events on the ground in much of the world today.

Back to Afghanistan…Perhaps you are actually arguing that we are in fact deliberately targeting civilians? I don’t want to argue with your perceived experience as you seem to have many more years under your belt than I do, but after 10 months deployed to Afghanistan, I would adamantly contend that I have yet to observe the deliberate targeting of civilians on this battlefield. Every individual my unit has killed has been an armed enemy combatant engaged in actions with the intent to kill either myself, another soldier, or an innocent civilian. Has your experience here in Afghanistan been different?

Perhaps your contention is that war is completely evil and is never the solution. This is the argument of pacifists – and no I do not use that term as a curse word. At their core, pacifists believe that any act of war or aggression should be avoided at all costs. They argue that because there is nothing more precious than human life no one should ever use lethal force to impose their will. A compelling argument, nonetheless, if this is indeed your contention, I would politely point you to the works of Saint Augustine. A useful philosopher even to the non-Christian to expand your field of view on moral arguments in war. (Grotius is another excellent read, but I digress…)I can not possibly summarize all of St. Augustine’s views in this letter, yet important to this discussion is his illustration of the necessity of societies to first form and then function and then indeed defend themselves for individual humans to live anything more than animal-like lives. The pacifists fail to substantively illustrate how a society is to defend itself from utter destruction without at least the ability to impose its will through violent means when that becomes necessary. Saint Augustine argues that individuals – when they form societies or states – essentially give their inherent right to defend themselves to the state. In return each individual is more aptly safeguarded from the forces of fear and terror. The state then entrusts certain individuals, soldiers, with the responsibility for defending the individuals of the said society. The state in giving the soldiers this duty to its individuals also provides for them a means of living and sustenance.

I have trouble with the pacifists viewpoint chiefly because it seems to answer to a hypothetical reality and does not seem to answer to a natural world present at this time. What fundamentally is the explanation the pacifists for why war exists? Mine is simple, war exists for one reason: It works as a means of solving conflict. That’s not to say there aren’t other means of solving conflict, but as long as there are two conscious entities on our planet we shall have different viewpoints. Different viewpoints inherently can lead to conflict and this inherently can eventually lead to war. Ultimately warfare exists as a means of solving problems. There are many entities on our planet at the present time and each have their own paradigms, intentions, and goals. As long as one of two actors resorts to violent means we shall have war.

Finally, you seem very wrapped into the arguments of the Nuremberg trials as a context for the validity of the Global War on Terrorism in general. Here again, dear sir, you are mistaken. Though I would agree that as volunteers in a free and generally informed country we as individual soldiers do have a greater responsibility to know the facts of who and why we are fighting, your views seem to neglect the generally held viewpoints of the Just War Tradition recognized throughout the world. Specifically, I am referring to jus ad bello and jus im bellum, or the justice of war and the justice in war. Justice of war is the broader context of the war as it relates to the perceived rational policies of the actors (nation-states) in the conflict. I would love to illustrate how our side does indeed have a moral imperative superior to our enemies, but this point is irrelevant to the discussion you have raised. Justice in war is what you seem to be judging Specialist Abes on and as his commander throughout this deployment I have yet to observe him engage in acts immoral, unethical or illegal. Further, I have never observed him do anything which would ultimately contribute to someone else committing such an act. If you are aware of such actions, feel free to bring them to my attention. Any such acts in violation of the Law of Land Warfare shall be thoroughly investigated, and he shall be punished accordingly. I have observed him nearly everyday, and I am quite confident that he has always performed his duties in an upright and professional manner respectful to Afghan local nationals and our adversary. Respectfully, I believe your point here is wildly imaginative.

On a final note, I am receptive to your viewpoint though admittedly I have little time to engage in lengthy discussion. Tomorrow, I have to plan for a several Village Medical Outreaches and Humanitarian Civil Assistance operations we have coming up to help the starving and diseased citizens of this beloved country. Having said that I would like for you to please explain more clearly a few of your contentions. They are as follows:

(a) How does the U.S. government engage in and promote terrorism to an extent unmatched in the world?
(b) In what way were the “sanctions” illegal? I am no lawyer, but if you could direct me to the code of law you are referring to I would appreciate it?
(c) I would ask you to get into specifics on the economics of Afghanistan in the pre-Taliban, Taliban, and post-Taliban time period, because I have a hard time believing that such “sanctions” caused the crimes against humanity that existed prior to our presence in this country. I will even concede – though admittedly grudgingly – that the US clout is such that economic sanctions are somewhat effective in isolating a regime or even a population. Having said that in this case have you bothered to seriously look at the economic activity present before and after the “sanctions” imposed on the Taliban’s regime? Please explain your point.

The aforementioned views expressed do not necessarily reflect official policy of the U.S. Department of Defense or any of its subordinate commands. They are mine and mine solely as are all mistakes in grammar and spelling. Sir, I remain at your humble service and welcome your response.

Respectfully,
Jeremy R. Turner
CPT, IN
Commanding

reply to one point...
by PJD Sunday, Jan. 22, 2006 at 10:17 PM

Cpt. Turner:

I'll just respond to one of your remarks:

"With such a definition in mind, I fail to see how our government has done such a thing. I would appreciate if you would please specify how, “(a) the U.S. government engages in and promotes terrorism to an extent unmatched in the world.” I find this hard to believe."

The US does not always perform acts of "terrorism" in accordance with your constrained definition, but it it has, over the past 55 years, indiscriminately killed millions of innocent people, who were never a threat to US citizens in any way whatsever, in military pursuit of it's foreign policy (i.e. business) objectives. I fine the distinction irrelavant. I'll explain further:


1. One type of case is where the US is after some "boogyman" and they just don't care who is in the line of their fire - especially when those in the way are poor or dark-complected. One small example was the minimum of 3000 Panamanians killed in airstrikes which unsuccssfully targeted the fallen-out friend of the US, Manuel Noriega.

2. Another type is where they simply kill everyone who either might be the "enemy" or might become one someday - this was once called: "killing a village in order to save it" Examples of this were the million or so South Vietmanese killed in the 1960's and 1970's; and the 100,000 or so mostly civilian Iraqis killed to date by US forces.

3. But some of US actions are just plain terrorism, in accordance with your definition, using B-52's instead of crude car bombs or such, to "weaken the will of the enemy nation". About two million people in Cambodia, Laos and North Vietnam met their demise this way.

4. Also, the US has engaged in extensive terrorism by proxy. The US supported, and even educated on US soil (at the school of the Americas) terrorst gangs who through the 1980's terorized villages in Nicaragua, El-Salvador and Honduras, killing at least a hundred thousand. In Indonesia, the US abetted the dictator Suahrto - actually providing him with lists of names - in the killing of up to a million Indonesians, mostly for peaceful activities in organizing labor unions or membership in certain political parties.

This sort of action is currently going on at a lesser scale in Haiti where the US has supported the killing of thousands of Hatians to date just because of their membership in a certain political party.

5. Sometimes the US is a guilty party to killing simply because it knows that one of it's friends are commiting mass terrorism, could stop it with a simple phone call, but refuses to - a degree of culpability which implies full support. This is how about 200,000 East Timorese were killed by UD friend Suharto.

One can probably easily tally up at least 10 milllion people killed by the US military, or the CIA through proxies, since the end of World War II. Not a single one of these people were a physical threat to the US in any way - most of them only wanted what we want, freedom and independence, or they simply supported and economy based on Christ's Sermon on the Mount.

This account is quite incomplete: for more information I recommend you read the following:

1. Killing Hope - U.S. Military and CIA Interventions since World War II

2. Rogue State - A Guide to the World's Only Superpower, and;

3. Freeing the World to Death - Essays on the American Empire

all by William Blum

Thanks,

PJD

Response to Mr/Ms. RM86
by CPT Turner Monday, Jan. 23, 2006 at 6:20 PM

I would like to thank you for your thoughtful and careful response to my letter. I believe we are more well served by at least engaging in reasonable discourse if nothing else. Having said that I do think there exists some futility in the discussion as it is clear from your last letter that we will not likely be able to converse from the same basis of facts.

If it is your belief that the United States has done as many of the things as you apparently believe, it remains doubtful that we can fully expand further. I whole-heartedly believe your statements are complete misrepresentations of fact and gross exaggerations.

And with that…I begin.

I had not realized upon my initially being informed of your letters (which characterized one of the Soldiers under my command as a war criminal) your generally held world views. Specifically I am referring to your views concerning market-based economy and on US foreign policy. After a more thorough review I feel better informed.

I have, as point of fact, read Mr. Blum’s essays in the past, – though I have admittedly not read his books. Certainly there is value in reading his works (even though I fully disagree with everything he writes save his use of grammar), but I would suggest that you perhaps expand your field of view to some other authors. I think that you will have some ideological comfort with Mr. Chomsky, but even beyond that I think you should read Mao Tse Tung’s Little Red Book and Karl Marx as well. I do not state this sarcastically, instead I would suggest that this will give you a more broad view of the foundations of the ideology. Ultimately, I believe that this ideology subordinates the individual to the state not perhaps by design but more of how it is applied in a chaotic, natural world.

In your case, however, a more encompassing view of the ideology will aid your discussions in the future, because it will allow you to sift through the unnecessary banter and false accusations endemic within your letters. In other words, we can engage in a more meaningful discussion because the temptation for the “liar, liar pants on fire,” argument will be mitigated.

Though it is tempting, rather than focus on the specifics you have outlined so eloquently (yet falsely) in your response, I think we will end up talking past each other, and we should simply agree to disagree on whether we engage in the systematic torture and killing of innocent civilians. If you doubt my sincerity or the coolness with which I react to your gross false accusations, I would just add that being shot a number times will do that to one’s perspective. So relax and feel free to disagree.

I would like to challenge you on your view of the United States and specifically its role in world affairs.

First, your arguments suggest a unity of purpose which is, well, simplistic. It would also seem that you possess an opinion that the United States is a great deal more powerful than it really is. I can tell you from my own personal experience that there are numerous actors within just this country. They all exists each with their own intentions, goals, and motivations (good, bad, and somewhere in-between). Here they include, farmers, drug traffickers, warlords, politicians, village elders, aide workers, jihadists, Americans, school teachers, Taliban, Coalition allies, little kids, truck drivers, militias, and shepards. Now consider that this is just one poor, third-world country and apply that knowledge to the unique number of actors which encompass the entire world. I think you would be well served to think of the dynamics throughout the planet and appreciate that as it applies to US foreign policy. Heck, just think about the diverging views which exists just on this website or any organization you may be a member of. Many humans interacting – and never does everyone agree on everything. So too do the State Department and Defense Department agree as do even the members of an opposing party you so deride.

To believe that the US is able to start wars and terrorize people simply on a whim (wink, nod, frown, or as it were by not making a phone call) is a massive under appreciation to the complexities which exist in a chaotic system of players. Could we get the UN Security Council to agree to military action in Afghanistan? Did we even try in fact? I mean after all isn’t this just a poor, desolate country and aren’t we the big, bad bully who tells everyone what to do? An honest attempt to view the US from the perspective of just being a player in a play (albeit a leading role) would be more useful.

An effective and rational way of analyzing world or community events is to view them through the eyes of actors involved and how they each see themselves. Further, it is critical to realize that each state will almost invariably act in ways which are inherently in their perceived self-interest. The danger in being too reliant on this system of analysis is that it can lead to a rationalization of events and incidents which are clearly objectively wrong or immoral. Your statement seems to imply that we should ignore the dynamics of players on the international stage to a point that we treat our own citizens interests last and the interests of the citizens of other countries somewhere behind that. With particular interest I read, “…membership in certain political parties.”

Aside from that fact that Mr. Suharto opposed the stated US interests on numerous occasions, and that the political parties in Haiti you speak of are really gangs, certainly, you would not disagree that the Nazis were a political party. As were the Taliban, the Soviet Era Stalin-Lenin Communists, the parties of Pol Pot, Kim Il-Sung, the Baathists…I could go on. Does it not defy logic to conclude that the US has no interest in how countries behave toward their own citizens? If nothing else then to secure our own safety from radical Wahabists bent on achieving an Islamic state encompassing most of the globe under sharia law?

We exists today and can engage in this discourse, because in no small part we fought the War with Mexico in the 1840’s or our conflict with the Indians as we made settlements in the west or for that matter that we dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We also helped rid the world of polio, small pox, Hitler and Hirohito. We also have some kick ass baseball parks and rock bands. The Romans invaded and conquered all of Eurasia killing massive numbers of civilians. The Romans also spread unbelievable knowledge and were at the forefront in world advances of government, infrastructure, economy, and sanitation. I don’t mean that as an outright rejection to our culpability to acts which caused the utter destruction of innocent lives. Rather, I would ask that you take a more holistic approach to your views on the United States.

Finally, I would like to readdress one of my previous comments. Each individual on this planet shall be held responsible for his own actions and those solely. We as a nation are in fact a collection of humans, each not perfect in his own right, and invariably – I would challenge – not in lockstep with one another bent on world domination. Our nation is not an entity entirely good nor is it entirely evil. I would contend that after an honest more thorough view we exists on our good days as a beacon of hope for the despondent the world over and on our worst days…well, still considerably better than the Soviet Union. I realize that you will most likely disagree with this view, but I would ask that you expand beyond your simplistic view of our actions since World War II.

Continuing to dwell on seemingly self-righteous anger and despair on our own house will (I believe) cause you more anger and despair. If you are not so inclined to expand your horizons, well…maybe you would be happier in socialist Norway. Best of luck with whatever you choose.

I remain at your humble service and welcome your response.

Respectfully,
Jeremy R. Turner
CPT, IN
Commanding

Correction
by CPT Turner Tuesday, Jan. 24, 2006 at 4:09 AM

My last comment was meant in response to Mr/Ms PJD. My sincere apologies for any confusion.

Thanks.

For RM86
by Bex and Beth Tuesday, Jan. 24, 2006 at 2:52 PM

Are you kidding me? You are so ignorant. Firstly, the “I was just following orders excuse?” you are trying to make a comparison to doesn’t actually mitigate any crimes under our country’s legal system AND more importantly to that point, your entire comparison of “Nazi soldiers” to this debate is completely irrelevant. You claim that, “You cannot separate the actor from the moral consequences of his or her intentional act.” How can you not in this instance? These are not rogue soldiers. These are soldiers of the United States Army who joined to serve and protect our country. Our friend Eric Abes joined the army in August of 2001. He believed he would train as a soldier but hopefully not have to put his training into practice. He joined in what we all believed to be for the most part, a time of peace. On September 11, 2001 that all changed and our friend Eric was shipped to Afghanistan. Does Eric get to make the decisions that affect his own safety and well being? No, we as citizens do and did that for him. We did when we elected President Bush, when we allowed our representatives to vote for legislation like the Patriot Act and when we allow our Senators and Congressman to continue to keep funding this war. Eric believed he would be getting out of the army several times over this past year only to be re-deployed to other countries of conflict. Again we ask, did Eric choose this or was it chosen for him by us, citizens of this country? It is the latter. So we choose to separate this actor (Eric) from the consequences of his actions because he is not merely following orders as you would suggest, but carrying out the wishes of his government as elected by his fellow-citizens. He has put his own beliefs, emotions, convictions aside to carry out what we have as voters told him are ours, to keep fighting, and until that changes, until we as voters make that change, we will continue to support our friend.

Feedback for "Bex and Beth"
by Panache Tuesday, Jan. 24, 2006 at 3:50 PM

Bex and Beth, whoever you are - after I read your retort, I wanted to stand up and applaud. It is certainly clear that you paid attention in your high school history classes! It is also nice to know that there are intelligent people out there who can form their own opinions instead of hopping on the scapegoat bandwagon and placing blame where it doesn't belong. You're 100% right about your friend, Eric Abes, who took it upon himself to join the US Army to give back to his country - without the intention of going to war. His is quite an honorable young man and it is a shame that there aren't more like him. Thank you for your time and God bless.

Bex and Beth..
by pjd Tuesday, Jan. 24, 2006 at 5:16 PM

Let me remind you that Hitler's actions, military and non-military, were also enthusiastically supported by a majority of his nation's people.

Have You Forgotten?
by Jen Tuesday, Jan. 24, 2006 at 9:44 PM
jwylie@spilmanlaw.com (412) 325-3309 2220 Stonecliffe Drive

I cannot believe some of the comments I have read in regard to this article. My blood pressure has skyrocketed, I’ve chain smoked three cigarettes so far, and tears have filled my eyes. I am thoroughly disgusted by RM’s comments.

RM, have you forgotten September 11th? Did you sleep through it? I remember briefly hearing about the events in NYC before I left for my job during college and then hearing that a plane hit the Pentagon, where my uncle worked, the towers falling. And I remember the local newscaster breaking in to say that a plane crashed in a Pennsylvania field. If the passengers on Flight 93 waited to act for even a few seconds, that plane could have crashed in Johnstown, ruining the town I grew up in and where my family and numerous friends still lived! I nearly lost my entire family and childhood by mere seconds.

Can you not imagine the terror and shock that was streaming through peoples’ minds as they watched the twin towers collapse, knowing that their parents, children, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc. were trapped inside? How can you say that the war in Afghanistan is ‘unnecessary and illegal’? Believe what you want about the war in Iraq. I have my own thoughts on the subject that I will not go in to.

How do you think we should have responded after 9/11? Sat back, shaken our finger at him and asked him politely not to do that again? Or do you believe, as PJD apparently does, that the US can stop such atrocities with a ‘simple’ phone call? Too bad FDR didn’t think of just picking up the phone and calling Hitler. We could have avoided World War II entirely! Do you think that if Al Qaeda was hiding out in Canada we wouldn’t be doing all that we are doing now? It has nothing to do with the ‘poor or dark-complected’.

Nothing in this life is simple...especially when it comes to acts of terror and defending our nation. You claim to be a patriot, yet it appears that you do not believe in the policies of this country. Why don’t you leave this country then? Or do you only stay to reap the rewards that come with being an American and living in this country?

No, I don’t agree with everything that our government chooses to do. Like in life, we have to take the good with the bad. It’s not as though the US just decided to invade Afghanistan for no logical reason. We, as Americans, have so much to protect. It is up to the leaders of this nation, who we ELECT, and the brave men and women who DECIDE to put their lives on the line so that you can spout your delusional, ideological opinions. This is far from a perfect world. We don’t live in a utopian society.

I’m glad others have responded to your comments as well. Truly, I am my father’s daughter. Maybe it’s my red hair and the fact that we’re Irish, but God help the person who is the room with either of us when they have a different political opinion (watch out, Eric!!). My sister and my mom run! So hopefully other people’s comments have expressed what I cannot clearly convey at this time.

To me, it’s as simple as this...September 11th happened. We should never forget that day, although it appears that so many of us have - or has political affiliation pushed it so far in the back of our minds that it’s just a distant memory? We, as Americans, must defend our homeland and way of life while continuing to do so much good throughout the world.

I am so grateful and thankful for all of the men and women who have made such a courageous choice to join the miliary. THANK YOU!

Eric, I have so much admiration, honor and respect for you. Come home safely.

Please Educate Yourselves!
by PJD Wednesday, Jan. 25, 2006 at 1:49 PM

Please educate yourselves regarding the history of US foreign intervention!

Your professed belief in some kind of innocent state for the world's Superpower - and the belief that the Sept. 11 attacks come out of nowhere, constitutes a level of ignorance which is would be unbelievable if it weren't so common among US citizens.

A few clarifications and reiterations:

1. The "simple phone call" referred to Indonesia, whose military was wholly constituted from US and, to a lesser degree, Australian military aid, and whose atrocities in 1965 and 1975 (East Timor), which killed hundreds of thousands, were being done only to the extent that they had US approval and support. So, of course the US could have stopped the atrocities by a simple phone call threatening cutoff of aid.


2. The crimes of September 11, were but a small taste of the violence the US has inflicted on the people of: Haiti, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Panama, Chile, Argentina,
Vietnam, Cambodia, Indonesia, East Timor and Iraq (bombings sanctions 1991 to 2003), and this list is incomplete.

These interventions are historic facts.

Like I wrote, a single US airstrike on a poor neighborhood in Panama, supposedly to kill former US friend Noriega, in 1989 alone killed more civilians than the Sept 11 crimes.

The ongoing US interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan have nothing to do with the September 11 crimes, but with extending US power. September 11 was a very convienient event used by the Bush administration to bamboozle the US public into supporting the military actions - which, particularly in Iraq, are war crimes under the Nuremburg protocols. Condoleeza Rice is known to have called the Spetember 11 attacks an "opportunity".

The US certinly could have captured Bin Laden a long time ago if it had treated the Sept 11 attacks as an international crime by stateless gang, which it was, rather than an "act of war" which it wasn't. The US would have taken advantage of the considerable amount of international goodwill, and dealt with the Taliban government in apprehending Bin Laden - this may sound distasteful, but certinly preferable to the bombs and bullets which were rained on tens of thousnds of desparately poor Afghans who has nothing to do with the Sept 11 attacks.

Longer term I like William Blums prescription:

"If I were the president, I could stop terrorist attacks against American targets in a few days. Permanently.

I would first apologize -- very publicly and very sincerely -- to all the widows and the orphans, the impoverished and the tortured, and all the many millions of other victims of American imperialism.

Then, I would announce that America’s global interventions -- including the awful bombings -- have come to an end. And I would inform Israel that it is no longer the 51st state of the union but -– oddly enough -– a foreign country.

I would then reduce the military budget by at least 90% and use the savings to pay reparations to the victims and repair the damage from the many American bombings and invasions. There would be more than enough money. Do you know what one year of the US military budget is equal to? One year. It’s equal to more than $18,000 per hour for every hour since Jesus Christ was born.

That’s what I’d do on my first three days in the White House. On the fourth day, I’d be assassinated."

(This should be obvious, but if it isn't, Mr. Blum is referring to a his assassination by interests in the US government and business community - like what likely happened to Dr. Martin Luther King. Not "terrorrists")

I know my remarks are likely to provoke a lot of anger from some readers. But this is a normal reaction when cherished closely held beliefs - those that provide a comfortable "roadmap" in a scary, confusing world, are violated. However, we only grow in our humanness and compassion when we cast aside these beliefs in pursuit of facts which provide a more accurate view of human affairs.

Think as an AMERICAN
by Jen Wednesday, Jan. 25, 2006 at 8:21 PM

First of all, let me correct you by saying that I do not believe that America is an innocent superpower. Far from it. But I do believe that this is the greatest country in the world.

No, September 11th didn’t ‘come out of nowhere’. Even if someone wanted to fly planes into buildings ‘just to see if they could’, logistically it would take years of training and planning to pull of an attack of that magnitude. But bin Laden and Al Qaeda didn’t attack the US as some sort of game. It took years of deep, intense hatred, not just against America, but the non-Islamic world. Bin Laden is a genius. He took what he learned from the US military during the Afghani war with the Soviets and used that knowledge against us. The 19 highjackers on 9/11 entered this country legally (even if their visas were expired, their I-94 cards have been valid); bin Laden knew that it would take our US intelligence 72 hours to intercept, interpret and analyze the phone call he placed to his mother the Sunday prior to 9/11 telling her something would soon happen and he wouldn’t be able to talk to her for a very long time. He chose to attack the US, not just because he disagrees with our morals and culture, but because we are the dominate superpower. He wanted to show the rest of the world that we were vulnerable in hopes that Islamic fundamentalists around the world would join him and rebel against us.

Take a look at your examples again showing US force throughout the world. Do you really believe that the US has gone in to Haiti, Indonesia, etc. just for the hell of it? The president, whoever it may and from whatever political party, has the duty to protect this nation. No civilian will ever know all the intelligence or inner workings of our government. We have to believe those who we elect have the best interest of our nation at heart. Hindsight is 20/20. Perhaps we shouldn’t have gotten involved in East Timor, or Panama, but are we just supposed to just sit back and watch the world turn? Choices were made based on who we feel our allies are at the time, and how they can help us. Selfish, maybe. But how else is a nation supposed to survive?

Suppose we didn’t assist in Afghanistan and let the USSR run amok. Sure, Al Qaeda may not have formed, or maybe not to the extent that it has, and 9/11 may not have happened. But then again, we could all be communists right now under Soviet rule. The USSR didn’t even know it was on the verge of collapse. How were we supposed to? What if we did nothing after Pearl Harbor attacked us? The Jewish religion may just have been something we read about in history books. But then again, we wouldn’t have cared because we would have been brainwashed by Hitler’s propaganda too. You can sit around and play these ‘what-if’ games all you want. Enjoy yourself.

I work as a paralegal in the immigration field. I worked with a client who came over as a refugee. She escaped the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. And where did she come? She came to the US. She came here with nothing. Just the clothes on her back, literally. Now she owns three restaurants and is doing extremely well.

What about the woman from El Salvador who I helped obtain asylum? Her horror stories stem from the dissidents, not the government that the US backed. Go talk to her and see if she hates the US for giving her and her son a safe haven after thugs kidnapped her husband in the middle of the night. She hadn’t seen or heard from him for 10 years before she left her country.

Why do you think millions of immigrants cross our borders each year - legally or illegally? Why do they work so hard to get over here, risking everything? You can sit back and repeat ‘expert’ opinion that you’ve read off of someone’s website or you can take a step back and think for yourself.

Inevitably there is going to be innocent bloodshed in every intervention, conflict and war. It is a sad part of life. But unfortunately it is necessary. There were so many civilian, innocent, deaths during World War II, but I’m glad I’m not a Nazi today.

Do you really think that we’re in Afghanistan and Iraq to ‘extend our power’? If that were the case, why have both countries had their first truly democratic elections in decades? Why have we rebuilt roads, schools, vaccinated children, given out food, medicine, etc. and are still helping them create their constitution and government? Why didn’t we leave after we captured Saddam Hussein and leave Iraqi people, who we freed from tyranny, to clean up our mess? Why do we constantly give billions of dollars of foreign aid to countries who are not our allies? In 2004, the US gave $18.9 billion in humanitarian foreign aid, more than twice what the next closest country gave. Sure, part of the reason is in hope that we will receive help someday if we need it, but how often do we? But America is still a compassionate country.

Reduce the military budget? Yeah, okay...the only comment I’ll give you is this: someone I personally know worked for a company contracted out by the Pentagon. He told me ‘you have no idea how many terrorist attacks we have stopped since 9/11'. I couldn’t get any more from him than that, but that statement should be enough of a reason to increase our defense budget.

Do yourself a favor and stop listening to your hero, William Blum. He’s living in a fantasy world. This world is going to hell in a hand basket. There are so many things wrong with the way this and other countries are run that it’s mind blowing. However, this is where we are today. This is where our scientific and technological advances have gotten us. We can give a cancer patient chemotherapy and we can give a terrorist the tools to make a bomb. Take the good with the bad.

Right now, I’m speaking as an American citizen, not a war analyst or philosopher, who was deeply affected by the events on September 11th. To say this war is ‘unnecessary’ deeply offends me. America can never back down. I agree, I’m not an expert on the US military or US interventions In the least. And, as I’ve said, I don’t think that the US is innocent. I’ll stop rambling now as I’m so disappointed in the way Americans are ‘supporting’ our country that I can’t even express myself as clearly as I would like to. Although I have so much more I could say. But I will say this, I would rather take this NECESSARY war to their country before they bring it back to ours.

Jen...
by PJD Thursday, Jan. 26, 2006 at 12:19 AM

A few points...

1. The Kymer Rouge arose as a direct consequence of Nixons hateful rain of bombs on Cambodia - killing at least a million; that's 333 Sept. 11's

2. Please, none of this "everyone wants to come here". If you visit any economically strong city around the world - like Toronto, Melbourne, Paris, London and probably many others, - you will see considerably more vibrant immigrant communities there (especially comapred to Pittsburgh). The question is, what happened to these once peaceful, self-sufficient nations which required so many of it's people to emmigrate to "industrialized" countries simply to find gainful work? Have you noticed that the biggest number of immigrants looking for work come from countries with a history of imperialist meddling? Why do you see a lot of poor Vietnamese immigrants, but few poor Thai ones? Why do you se a huge number of central Americans coming north, but few Venezuelans?

3. As for the Salvadoran immigrant, While her story just might be true, please consider that, if she had stated that her husband had been killed by US supported death squads, what do you think her chances of being granted assylum would have been? I do know that the US has given assylum, and provides safe harbor to, many right-wing terrorists, Such as anti-Cuba terrorists Orlando Bosch, Luis Posada Carriles, and Emmanual Constant leader of the dreaded FRAPH of Haiti.

Independent investigations have shown that the overwhelming majority of killings in El Salvador were done by US supported death squads. FARC did not kill anyone unless they were identified as members of, or in command of, a death squad. In comparison, the death squads killed people simply for trying to organize a labor union...or less.

4. If the US respects democracy, why are they still in Iraq? An overwhelming majority of Iraqis wanted the US occupiers out of their country two years ago. Why does the US not comply with their wishes?

5. I challenge you to find one act of bloodshed by the former USSR in the past 50 years that comes close to what the US has done in the same time period. Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and even Afghanistan, as indefensable as they were, don't come close to Vietnam East Timor, or Chile.

6. The US has been the crusher of hope around the world - murderer of democratic President Allende on September 11 1973; of President Trujillo of Panama, of the Martyr Bishop Oscar Romero, and soon, murderer of the imprisoned Father Jean Juste of Haiti - murderer of these poeple and many, many more simply because they advocated an economic system based our Lord Jesus Christ's Sermon on the Mount.

6. As far as your assertion that the elections in Iraq (or the US for that matter) are "truly democratic" please ask if the Iraqis if they thought they were. The most common answer in surveys why they voted because they felt it was the only thing they could do to maybe get the murderous US occupiers off their soil. Democracy means much more that choosing a from pre-selected tweedledum and tweedledees on a ballot. The US is the most egregious example of phoney democracy. For example, an opinion survey was conducted a couple elections back which asked those polled to review the platforms of various candidates, including minor ones, and pick the ones they liked best. The winner was... Dave McReynolds of the Socialist Party USA. A majority of USAns* supported SP-USA's platform of universal healthcare, living wage, disarmament, non-intervention and strong action against global environmental catastrophe. Subsequent polls show that a majority still support these positions. So, if the US is such a fine democracy, why are these issues absent from any discussion in Congress, and why is are SP-USA candidates absent from the ballot in all but a handful of states? Why, in Pennsylvania for example, do the Repub/Democrats only require a few hundred ballot petetion signatures, while small parties require hundreds of thousands of signatures to get their candidates on the ballot? Please study the electoral systems in other countries - Latin America is typical: voters have at least a dozen parties on their ballots to choose from, and a party wins only when they show a absolute (50% plus 1) majority using a runoff election if necesary.

Of course, I will not even mention the proven electoral chicanery Florida in 2000 and probable electoral corruption in Ohio and probably other states in 2004.

7. Finally, by what criteria do you consider the "greatest country in the world". The latest UNHDR "Human development Index" report ranks the US as 10th in the world - not a bad score to be sure, but behind most western European countries and Canada.

8. Finally, rather than "thinking as an American" why don't you start "thinking as a citizen of Humanity"? Please consider that evil never announces itself as such - it comes pre-packaged in the most righteous flag-waving, star spangled wrapping imaginable. Hitler believed his mission was to save Europe from the twin evil scourges of Communism and the Jews - and nothing could get in the way of it. But, Communism arose in response to worker's virtual enslavement and misery at the hands of Capitalist production, and the Jews' clannish communities that the Germans disliked were in response to repeated racist pogroms.

Bush thinks his mission is to save the world from "terrorism" and nothing can get in the way of it. But Islamic-based international terrorism, which is a greatly inflated threat compared to nuclear war or runaway global warming, is simply a response to US, British and Israeli opression, murder and occupation in the Arab world. Ever heard of the golden rule? Stop the opression, get out, apologise, and their threats will stop.





* Note: I use the term USAn because Latin Americans are offended when we monopolize the term "America". The US is but one country in the American hemisphere.

To PJD
by TCR Thursday, Jan. 26, 2006 at 3:57 AM

Believe it or not, I have never written in one of these before. Is this what you call a Blog? I got directed to this rolling dialogue acouple of days ago and, once I found it, have been following it with some interest. I find myself curious about you personally, BJD. Every time I check this site out I find you've written another thesis, footnoted mostly by this Blum fellow whom no one heard of until he was quoted by OBL. I see you write in here at all times of the day and night. Do you have a regular job? You are obviously a very intelligent person, but you seem to have no aim in your life but to condem from a morally indignant and superior position. Is it because this is what you do? I'll wager you are female. I truly do not mean for this to sound like a personal attack on you, but, as I said earlier, I am curious.

Anyway, I would like to see you go back and debate the good captain more on some of his points. I was getting the impression that you were sidestepping some of his observations or arguments. He admitted you had valid views on some issues; I never saw you give him that courtesy. I suspect that you don't get much negative feedback on your own turf when you state these views. It must be disconcerning to be disputed by a grunt. He actually seems to know more about world affairs and even philosophy than you. This is amazing.

I suspect Captain Turner might not discourse with you too much more. I'm sure he's pretty occupied right now being in combat and all. I'm just proud that he and the other soldiers in that unit are who they are. No, they're not perfect and neither is our government. However, I believe that our American package, taken as a whole, is the best the world has ever seen. These men probably wouldn't like you if they met you, but--misguided as you obviously think they are--they are fighting and risking their lives so that you and others may state your opinions so freely. That is what they believe and I do too. You certainly can't disagree with their motives on that can you? I don't want to sound trite but you do realize that you could never have stated your worldview so openly nor could you rail against your government in any of these other third world nations you feel we have abused so violently. And expecially not Afghanistan or Iraq.

I'll make a deal with you, DJB. I've got to go to bed now so I can get up and go to work tomorrow as the proletarian that I am. Now that I'm sending this off for your perusal, I'll check here in a day or so to see if you and the soldier can carry on with your non-profane debate. And I do thank you for that--not resorting to gutter language. The deal is...I'm not going to respond to you or anyone else in this room(?). I can see how this could get addictive, but I'm afraid ,if you spend your whole time at this, you might as well be playing video games. Go do something productive. Feed the poor yourself. Give some money away. That's how we each as individuals make this globe a better place. Not by criticizing.

Not a shitty 'country' song
by qwer Thursday, Jan. 26, 2006 at 1:13 PM

Jen, where were you when the WTC was attacked in '93? What about all the crazy ass white 'Americans' who blew up abortion clincs and the federal building?
I can't think as an American, because there is no such thing. Nations are imaginary, they are consenus reality.
Show me a nation. You can't. You could show me a map or a piece of ground, but nations are still make-belive.

OBSERVING
by DAD Thursday, Jan. 26, 2006 at 5:09 PM

My son is Eric about whom the article was first written. As an "old" man I don't have the typing skills to write a dissertation. Suffice it to say as Eric (in Afghanistan) & I (in Pittsburgh) monitor your writings the freedom of expression (w/out commenting on the content) means that you are all winners. Preserving same sometimes is unpleasant. I strongly disapprove of the "war"& how we got there & what it is doing to our freedoms. Political action by those both in & out of office is the only way to stop the eroding of our liberties.Get involved & put the right (no pun) people in office. To say it doesn't matter or that they are all dishonest means you don't care enough.Put pressure on your elected officials ,work to defeat those you disagree with & harder to elect their replacements. That's how this country started & that's how we will get it back.

Thanks
by Jen Thursday, Jan. 26, 2006 at 8:17 PM

Again, my blood pressure has skyrocketed and I’m too young for that. I’m 25, so qwer, that made me 12 in 1993 and living in Florida at that time, and the only thing I cared about was jumping into my pool after I got home from school.
Anyway, I’m done. I vented another way about the idiotic comments I’ve read from some of you. I have better ways to spend my time than read what someone, has regurgitate from another website or book, wrote.
But let me say, specifically to RM, that I feel so bad for you. Obviously you are extremely bitter and hateful toward our country. You chose to focus on the negative instead of the positive. I noticed the majority of your examples of the US’s ‘tyranny’ and ‘atrocities’ were not very recent. I think you have just been spoon fed enough opposition to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to have a legitimate argument.
Think back for a second about all the opportunities you’ve had by being an American. And I emphasize opportunities. This country has become a nation full of people who feel they are entitled to everything. Forget about working for something. I say this in case you can’t see past your misery to remember any opportunities that you have had to make your life better for yourself.
I do want to thank you though. I shared your latest comments with my friend and we had several good laughs over them today! I’m going to go now and continue to enjoy my life instead of getting angry over Americans who hate America (again, I’m directing this toward RM, not all of you). Besides, I don’t want to get carried away and say something that may offend someone. Yes, I think freedom of speech has become limited.
Qwer, it is a country song, one of the very very few I like, because it’s true, it’s raw, and too many people in this country seem to have forgotten what happened that day.
I will continue to support this country, these wars and all of our troops until the end.
God bless America and save us from those who don’t realize how good they have it here.

and Thank-You Jen...
by pjd Sunday, Jan. 29, 2006 at 6:07 PM

I have learned that, in the USA, being "patriotic" means:

1. To be selfish and to only care about one's own fortunes to the expenses of others.

2. To worship wealth - to claim the right to consume planet-destroying resources, in any quantity, at the expense of future generations and possibly the future of life on Earth itself.

3. To show nothing but callousness to preventable human suffering. Compassion is only for family or someone you are close to, or someone who looks like, or you think wants to be just like, yourself.

4. To be utterly incapable of walking in another's shoes, and exhibit complete ignorance of the golden rule.

4a. As a corollary to the above, the belief that we have the unilateral right to order nation's affairs as we wish; and,

4b. An utter inability to see the conditions we inflict on others we ourselves would find intolerable if they were inflicted on us. For example, if the US was invaded, and it's government overthrown, it would be our patriotic duty, and right under international law, to engage in armed resistance against the occupiers and anyone cooperating with the occupiers.

5. To adhere to a utterly pessimistic view of human nature, to hold a view that one will be brutalized unless one brutalizes; which leads to,

6. Paranoid and preposterous beliefs that small vitrtually unarmed nations somehow have the desire and means to invade and overthrow the United States.

In other words, to be a clinical sociopath and to profess being a Christian while rejecting the very heart of Christ's teachings.

Author's note
by Caleb Schaber Sunday, Jan. 29, 2006 at 7:03 PM
caleb.schaber@gmail.com Kabul, Afghanistan

I spent 5 days riding with Spc. Abes on that mission and have been in Afghanistan over 3 months. I would recommend you visit this country before you start making assumptions about what is going on here, just as I have. For all the complaining against the US government in these comments, isn't nice that you can do that? It sure wasn't that way here under the Taliban. There are many positive things going on here, which I hope to write more about. Thanks for reading the article and thinking about this issue.

nvnewswire.com

This Guy is Unstable
by Not Caleb Tuesday, Mar. 07, 2006 at 6:13 PM

http://bm.tribe.net/thread/de48b774-a275-4da6-b1f2-f08585e034ff

Unstable=Understatement
by thanks, not caleb Wednesday, Mar. 08, 2006 at 2:53 PM

http://people.tribe.net/shooter-666?_click_path=Application%5Btribe%5D.Person%5B6bd51b2d-b1c9-4bcd-850d-876bbcac3aa1%5D
He seemed kinda sane from the original article, but's apparently a fucking maniac.

wow
by Caleb "Shooter" Schaber Monday, Mar. 13, 2006 at 7:07 PM
caleb.schaber@gmail.com

How very educating and thought provoking. . .