The big news of the summer for those not obsessed with Michael Vick and Larry Craig has been the preliminary results of the “surge” strategy in Iraq. There is a heated argument over whether the surge is working, and if so, how much. It will only intensify as General Petraeus gives his official report to Congress later this month. Supporters and opponents of the war are already trying to win the battle of public opinion.
To that end, Freedom’s Watch, a pro-war group has launched a $15 million, five week ad campaign. The ads feature wounded veterans from Iraq making an emotional pitch to viewers to stay the course.
In the first one, a soldier tells us: “Congress was right to vote to fight terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan. I reenlisted after Sept. 11th because I don’t want my sons to see what I saw. I want them to be free and safe. I know what I lost. I also know that if we pull out now, everything I’ve given and the sacrifices will mean nothing. They attacked us, and they will again. They won’t stop in Iraq. We are winning on the ground and making real progress. It’s no time to quit. It’s no time for politics.”
What most struck me most about the group though, were not its ads, but an appearance on Hardball by one of its founding members, former White House spokesman Ari Fleischer. His naïveté was stunning; he thinks that, “everybody in this country is making a sacrifice” in the war. Worst of all, he couldn’t even name the brave soldier his group was using in its ads.
Paul Rieckhoff, the next guest on the show said it best: “What bothered me most is that Ari Fleischer didn't even know the guy's name. He's willing to run a multi-million dollar campaign utilizing the personal story of a soldier, and he couldn't tell you on national TV what that soldier's name is…Our troops are not political props and they're not chew toys.”
For me, Fleischer’s comments on the show highlighted the divide between those of us who are sacrificing in this war, and those who aren’t. However much Fleischer might downplay it, there’s a huge difference between the mostly working class men in the military, and the chicken hawk aristocrats who exploit their stories of heroism. To men like Fleischer — and a whole host of war supporters — soldiers like the one in the ad are nameless, faceless pawns in their neocon imperialist adventures.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Dave Nalle
You know, I can forgive the partisanship, the bias and the offensive hatemongering and class warfare rhetoric. But I really have to draw the line at the straight-out lying. I realize they let you get away with it in the lefty echochamber, but in a more general audience someone is likely to call you on it.
Lie #1:
at the same time that they made soldiers buy their own body armor
Soldiers in Iraq were all provided with body armor which was standard for the US military at the time of deployment. What they did not have was improved body armor which was in limited deployment and which could not be manufactured fast enough to meet the deadline for deployment. No one was sent to Iraq any less well equipped than they were in Somalia or Bosnia or the first Gulf War.
Lie #2:
and scrimped on veteran's benefits..
In fact, this administration has spent more on veterans benefits and improving the VA than any other administration in history. Even adjusted for inflation they have increased the VA budget by almost 50% in 6 years. What's more they have increased the spending per veteran by more than 50% and they have doubled the yearly rate of increase in VA appropriations from what it was in the 1990s. So suggesting they have scrimped on veterans benefits is truly offensive.
Dave
2 - Marcus Alexander Gadson
As for my "lies" Mr. Nalle,
1. The fact is that many soldiers weren't given the armor that would actually save them in this war, and so had to buy it themselves. And that's just not right, no matter how you spin it.
2. I'm not the only one saying benefits were cut. The fact of the matter is that veterans benefits still are not good enough; just look at Walter Reed. I challenge you to prove that veterans health care is sufficient. What you said might pass muster in a right wing echo chamber, but I'm going to call you out on it. Accusing me of lying is what's truly offensive.
3 - Dave Nalle
Nice try at spin control there, Marcus. Won't fly, though.
The armor which would 'save' the soldiers in the war was a relatively new development which had not been generally deployed yet. Are we supposed to not engage in war until every new technology is deployed? Perhaps we should just forgo all military action until we can replace living soldiers with robots. The soldiers were deployed with the standard equipment available at the time. The fact that something better became available doesn't mean that what they were originally given was not appropriate.
As for 'cutting' benefits, how is that even possible given the increase in spending and the improvements in efficiency at the VA. Every veteran I know who uses VA services has commented favorably on how much better they are than they were a decade ago. And I didn't say the situation was perfect, as demonstrated with the situation at Walter Reed. However, you said Veternas benefits, and Walter Reed is an in-service hospital and not part of the VA. And how anyone could define a 50% increase in spending as 'scrimping' is beyond me.
But to be fair I'll withdraw my accusation of lying. It may be that you're just ignorantly repeating talking points with no real knowledge of the subject, rather like Bush and his misinformed claims about WMDs.
Dave
4 - SFC SKI
There's a big difference between pushing propaganda and airing a shared opinion. I have served two tours in Iraq, and I also would urge Americans not to give up on supporting the war until Iraq is stable.
5 - Baronius
Marcus, have you ever seen the ads that "attacked Cleland's patriotism"? There's only one ad posted on YouTube. It doesn't question Cleland's patriotism; it nails him on Senate votes. I'm starting to think that the Chandliss Attack Ad is an urban legend.
Anyway, I totally disagree with your article, but I'd love to hear from you about Chandliss.
6 - Clavos
Thank you, SFC SKI, for your service and for your input on the war.
As a veteran who has been treated by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for many years, I feel eminently qualified to comment on the level of care provided by one of the few federal government civilian agencies that really does meet its obligations and fulfill its mission.
Without going into boring details, I have a number of problems incurred as a result of my service in Vietnam in the sixties. As I said, I have been a VA patient for many years, in several hospitals in a variety of cities, but I'm in Miami now, so I'll address the care at the Miami VA Medical Center (VAMC), which is typical of VA hospitals nationwide.
First of all, the physical building ain't pretty. It's not painted in eye-pleasing pastels as the private hospital in the next block where my wife is treated, is. This is where the VA saves money; they don't worry about non core items, they DO take care of staff, equipment, labs, and most of all, the patients.
The medical staff are second to none, both in their knowledge and professionalism, and in their caring, attentive and even loving attitudes. Most of them are vets themselves; they work hard, work smart, and most of all, they treat us with respect and caring.
The physician staff at Miami VAMC are the top in this area in their specialties. Many are associated with the University of Miami School of Medicine as Professors and/or Deans. All of the Chiefs are UM docs. There are no better physicians in South Florida. Interestingly, Donna Shalala, who, along with Robert Dole, was appointed to head up the commission to study and make recommendations for improvements to veterans health care, is the President of the U of M.
Dave mentioned that Walter Reed, which was revealed recently to have very serious deficiencies, is not part of the VA system. This is true, Reed is an Army hospital, administered and staffed by the Army, with no connection whatever to the VA.
For the record, according to the Office of Management and Budget, the 2007 VA budget is a 69% increase over VA funding in place when the Bush administration took office. The 2007 VA budget for medical care is 11.2% larger than the 2006 budget.
The charge that the VA is neglecting the nation's veterans' medical care is simply not true.
7 - Dave Nalle
It's Chambliss, dammit.
Dave
8 - Dr Dreadful
That sounds great, Dave. I'll have a nice chilled glass of Chambliss. And a croissant. Thanks.
9 - Tom W.
Those poor, helpless vets, used so heartlessly by the evil right-wing chicken hawks.
What's the world coming to when evil right-wing chicken hawks put guns to the heads of brave vets and force them to appear in ads against their will?
We need courageous progressives to rise up and protect our brave but stupid soldiers, who are clearly too dumb to make their own decisions and have their own opinions.
10 - REMF
"Marcus, have you ever seen the ads that "attacked Cleland's patriotism"?"
Baronius, did you ever read the BC poster who referred to Cleland as a "gigantic thalidamide baby"?
11 - Craig Ranapia
Personally, I'm rather nauseated by anyone using mutilated soliders as campaign props - but I guess calling both sides out on their offensive hypocrisy is a little too close to the bone for everyone.
12 - Dave Nalle
For me it comes down to what the soldiers choose to believe and support. They've got as much right as anyone else to state their opinion and lend their support to whatever cause they like.
Dave
13 - SFC SKI
Clavos, thank you as well. #9, good points, I doubt everyone will get the sarcasm.
Which is more likely to be misconstrued, having a living veteran express his opinion, or using the name and picture of a deceased veteran posted, or just picture of a casket draped in an American flag, on an anti-war pamphlet?
14 - troll
Ski - *I also would urge Americans not to give up on supporting the war until Iraq is stable. *
...not asking for a political statement here but what objective benchmarks do you propose (to help folks understand your use of 'stable')
15 - Baronius
REMF, BC posters cross the line all the time. The question of a Senate campaign crossing the line is far more interesting. You're as passionate as anyone when it comes to respecting vets; have you seen the anti-Cleland ads?
16 - Baritone
I, too am a Vietnam era vet who takes advantage of the VA for health care. While I have experienced a glitch here and there, overall I am in agreement with Clavos regarding the quality of care given by the VA.
As to the level of funding, the increases since Bush took office it should be noted at that time, we were NOT at war. There were few military casualties - and consequently, few recent Vets who required special care until after our incursion into Afghanistan and later into Iraq.
There have been by some counts around 30,000 military personnel wounded in those two conflicts. Although their initial care has been handled by active military hospitals and other facilities, once these men and women leave active service, most are turned over to the VA. The sheer increase in the numbers of patients necessitated more funds to provide rooms, beds, doctors, nurses, aids and other staff, diagnostic equipment, therapy facilities, etc.
There have been a few horror stories regarding recent war vets which may or may not have been connected with the VA. Some wounded soldiers were presented with bills for meals provided while in recovery. Some families were presented with a bill for their lost loved one's uniform - presumably the one they were wearing when blown to bits. These may amount to apocrypha. I can't say.
Nevertheless, I find the ads troubling as well. I've no doubt that the people in the ads are sincere and believe what they are saying. I doubt that they wrote what they say in the ads.
In the script noted in Marcus' piece I am troubled by the line, "They attacked us, and they will again. They won't stop in Iraq." This is once again the conflation of Iraq with 9/11. Certainly, Al Qiada now has a presence in Iraq. They didn't before we blew into town.
As to his statement regarding our "winning on the ground and making real progress" I doubt that fellow has any idea about that. That is what is being hashed over by the generals, the White House and Congress. Are we winning on the ground and making real progress? Haven't seen any evidence of it yet.
When it comes down to it, Iraq was and remains a bullshit war. Vietnam was a bullshit war. It is in my mind unconscionable that the powers that be are using crippled and maimed veterans to urge others to support the very war that crippled and maimed them so that Bush, Cheney and company can continue to bullshit this country and other young women and men can be killed, crippled and maimed.
The wide eyed naivete' of those who believe that our invasion of Iraq had anything to do with "freedom" or "fighting the war on terror" just hasn't been paying attention. Think oil. Think vengeance. Think christian nutballs.
Baritone
17 - Dave Nalle
Baritone, it should be noted that of the 30,000 wounded in Iraq, about 75% are returned to their duties within 48 hours, which means their wounds are very minor and likely will not require followup. The number seriously wounded is lower than it has been in prior conflicts.
From what I understand about the VA in the Bush era, the additional spending has been important, but what seems to have made more difference is the reorganization and changes in priorities so that veterans get more state of the art treatment and the old practices of giving them minimally adequate care and just stringing them along has become a thing of the past.
Dave
18 - Clavos
Baritone,
The VA currently treats something in excess of 5 million vets. For the sake of ease of calculation, let's call it an even 5M. As you say, there are approximately 30,000 wounded vets from Iraq. To be assured we're counting everybody, let's call it 40,000.
Over a pre-Iraq base of 4,960,000, 40,000 is a less than 1% increase in patients. The Bush years have seen an increase of 69% in VA medical funding.
Credit where due.
19 - Operation Yellow Elephant
millionaires " whose children aren't fighting in the military
The best way for those eligible to serve [healthy heterosexuals 41-or-under], who agree with President Bush and Ari Fleischer, to Support Our Troops is to contact military recruiters and Be A Man! Enlist!
Those not personally eligible to serve, who agree with President Bush etc., should encourage their own eligible relatives and friends, their circles of influence, to volunteer for military service.
If they won't do that, they really don't support the war, or President Bush, after all.
20 - Dr Dreadful
#19:
Whether or not we agree with the sentiments, I think we can definitely say that this is one of the best online handles. Priceless!
21 - vascodegama
Doc, you and I both know there's no such thing as a yellow elephant. The bastards are all pink ...
22 - vascodegama
Marcus Alexander gadfly
23 - Dr Dreadful
Or white...
24 - Baritone
Clavos, Dave, etal,
I won't argue the point too strenuously. But it should be pointed out though, that a large number of smaller VA hospitals and other treatment centers have been shut down over the last few years. I believe that now in Indiana there are only 2 or perhaps 3 VA facilities still in operation. It is now necessary for many vets to drive or be driven for as long as 2 to 3 hours to get treatment. Given the sometimes long wait, a 2 or 3 minute visit with a doctor may wind up taking virtually all day when taking the travel time into consideration.
What is more striking to me is the apparent condition of many of the patients. A few go back to WWII and Korea, some from the first Gulf war, Afghanistan and Iraq, but most hail from the Vietnam era. For the most part, they are a sad and sorry lot. I'm not claiming this to be the fault of the VA. But many of these people can rightfully claim that their useful lives were in whole or in part sacrificed for the totally wasteful and unnecessary war in southeast Asia. How fucking long is the learning curve?
B-tone
25 - Clavos
Baritone,
The closings of which you speak, while real, are part of the VA's efforts to both follow their patients (most of the closings are in Northern states and most vets these days are in the Sunbelt) and play catch up to modern medicine's emphasis on outpatient (as opposed to inpatient) treatment.
The closings received lots of negative publicity, mostly from politicians grandstanding and posturing to impress their constituents, but the VA currently serves a record number of patients, despite the closings, many of which were long overdue.
"...many of these people can rightfully claim that their useful lives were in whole or in part sacrificed for the totally wasteful and unnecessary war in southeast Asia."
Sadly, all too true.
If you don't already, and are able to do so, I invite you to volunteer at your local VA facility; it's very rewarding. Though not currently able to do so because of my wife's condition, both she and I used to, and enjoyed it immensely.