With the US Navy unable to detect a Chinese submarine inside a nuclear carrier's protective cordon until the sub surfaced "within viable range for launching torpedoes or missiles" at the carrier, a pending war with Iran, a nuclear Pakistan approaching a critical mass of angry civilians, and with staunch militarists like Republican Congressman Duncan Hunter denouncing the quality of the weapons to be used, describing such systems as the UH-72A Lakota - the European-made replacements for the workhorse American-made Bell and Sikorsky models - as significantly flawed, just why would the Havemore families of this nation want to recklessly endanger the health and lives of their scions and heirs in playing The Great Game v2.0? Even Henry Kissinger believes there is a need to "exhaust every possibility to come to an understanding with Iran."
The same could be said of all the other families who aren't as economically endowed as our self-appointed, fiscally-based superiors, but we don't have the necessary political connections gained from contributional pelf to avoid going to fight George W. Bush's Terror War Against Terror. We have to rely upon the likes of Barry Richard, whose self-interest in 2000 motivated his representation of George W. Bush before the Supreme Court in the Bush v. Gore recount suit, but who now believes that this administration’s assault on American liberties has gone farther than any other and needs to be stopped.
That there exists such a Havemore apostate is one reason that the Vast Write Wing Conspiracy is now attempting to "remind" America of how wonderful the Old Days of the Great Depression were just as the updated version begins to hit the store shelves in time for the Profit Holiday. Richard Mellon Scaife's Pittsburgh Tribune-Review published a paeon to the CCC, a product of that much-hated anti-American Socialist Franklin Roosevelt. But praising one's enemy through the story of the likes of CCC veteran John Livengood (Living Good????) when it suits the goals of an aggressive foreign policy in a time of self-proclaimed "war" might well be considered a sound strategy, especially when those you consider to be your flock aren't flocking to the colors to throw their bodies at your enemies.
Studies soon to be published in the management-oriented journal The Leadership Quarterly are being conducted to determine how to define and promote the heroic ideal to raise the necessary levies, but they miss the point the late author Stephen E. Ambrose made in his book Citizen Soldiers: "What held them together was not country and flag, but unit cohesion." How does one promote the ideal of unit cohesion when Them Whats Got gets more while the weak ones pay with their livelihoods?
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Dave Nalle
Realist, I do appreciate your effort to condense all of this propaganda and arrant nonsense into a single coherent form, but let me see if I can help you out with something that may be unfamiliar to you - actual facts.
Just one point for now. It's not the 'havemores' who are avoiding military service, unless you consider the very poorest in the country to be 'havemores', which seems a bit odd.
As I'm sure you've heard before, it's standard to break the population down into five quintiles of income.
Based on that breakdown the bottom quintile has the lowest level of military service at 14.6% and the second highest income quintile has the highest level of military service at 22.5%. What's more, the level of service is increasing for the top two quintiles and decreasing for the bottom two quintiles.
After 9/11 there was a marked increse in volunteers from upper income groups and a corresponding decline in recruits from lower income groups. After 9/11 you also see a measurable increse in recruits in 'red' states and a measurable decrease in recruits from 'blue' states. All of this suggest that in fact, those parts of the country and those segments of the economy who supposedly (though I disagree) benefit from and support the war more, actually went to fight more as well, directly contrary to what you suggest.
Of course, these numbers apply solely to new recruits between the ages of 18 and 24. Income levels are considerably higher when you include the relatively small number of older new recruits.
Dave
2 - Clavos
Realist,
Instead of writing these stupid screeds, why don't you DO something about the "Havemores?"
Go out and kill some of 'em. Start with the lawyers -- the ones in Congress. Then hit Wall Street. Come on down to Miami and nail all the Latino Havemores who refuse to speak English and own this town.
Then go to Caracas and get all the Chavista Havemores in their Hummers.
Arabia next. Nail all the Havemore ex camel herders and their veiled virgins.
Man, there are millions of 'em worldwide!
You'd better get started; you've got your work cut out for you.
3 - troll
once again - too long by half
4 - Nancy
Clavos, I applaud your suggestion. I think we should off all the Havemores. Or at least send them to Mao-style 're-education' camps.
5 - Clavos
Hold on a sec, Nancy, while I extract my tongue from my cheek.
I don't have anything against "Havemores" as a class. There are, of course, some (Hollywood actors, e.g.) whom I can't stand, but I don't think being wealthy is necessarily a bad thing.
In fact, what IS a "Havemore?" To someone making minimum wage, I'm sure I'M a Havemore, but I certainly don't think I am. To me, most physicians are Havemores (my brother in law certainly is WAY better off than I), yet Bill Gates would consider them small potatoes.
I was just trying to point out to Realist the illogic of his rant.
6 - Clavos
But I do have a yacht, MR.
A fillup for it costs $1500 these days (500 gals. X $3.00, marine diesel is cheaper [fewer taxes] than road fuel).
Tough, without a CC; have to carry a lot of cash.
7 - moonraven
I assume you are referring to the remains of GRANMA when you talk about your "yacht"....
What a laugh: clavos as a high roller!
Or has trafficking in gusanos become a lot more lucrative business than it used to be?
8 - Clavos
The remains of Granma are in a glass box in Habana; I've seen them.
My boat is right out behind my apt.; I can see it from my living room.
I'm decidedly NOT a "high roller" as I pointed out in #5.
9 - Martin Lav
The shame of this is that the Realist does point out that our Veterans are NOT being cared for properly by the same government that sent them on an ill-advised venture to Iraq.
Nalle,
You don't refute the stats about homeless veterans, so I presume you are somewhat aware of this epidemic? Or will you provide us with a contrary statistic that points to the democrats as the cause of this problem?
How about the outright refusal to diagnose PTSD to deny future benefits to our Veterans?
I'm sure you will say this is an "overused" diagnosis that designed to increase government bureaucracy and democratic pork programs as well?
10 - Clavos
"How about the outright refusal to diagnose PTSD to deny future benefits to our Veterans?"
Factual citation for that allegation?
I personally know at least a DOZEN veterans (from both VN and Iraq) being paid in excess of $3K a month (and being treated) for PTSD.
11 - Clavos
The homeless veterans point is true, to the extent that approximately 25% of US homeless are veterans.
However, the totality of homeless is as amuch due to the decision years ago to close down mental health facilities and turn their patients out. Those without means today form the bulk of the homeless, civilian and veteran.
According to wikipedia:
"The negative stereotypes (and an undercurrent belief that patients were "entitled to think what they wanted", rather than accept societal norms) continued to promulgate, however, and went even further in the backlash against social welfare policies in the 1980s, which led to massive deinstitutionalisation and funding cuts. These changes led to the closing of many mental hospitals and the further reliance on local community care. Many former patients, instead of reintegrating successfully into society or receiving community treatment, simply wound up as homeless persons."
12 - Clavos
I'm a Life Member of Disabled American Veterans, and I volunteer at the VA hospital.
Pretty much all my charity work and donations go to veterans.
13 - Martin Lav
Clavos,
I have first hand knowledge of the refusal, or I'll tone down to 'reluctance' of the VA to diagnose PTSD in returning combat veterans. By brother was a counselor at a VA Hospital and he was told outright that they could not / would not make this diagnosis because he made/kept the Gov't liable for the Vets treatment. Hence costing them a lot of money. The sad thing is, based on my brothers experience a simple 'reverse' boot camp that gets our warriors primed and pumped for combat action can get them toned down and ready to deal with civilian life. 8 weeks, with some helpful group therapy and they can use tools to help them cope with life.
Sorry, no links, trust me on this one.
14 - Clavos
I believe you, Martin. There HAS been a "tightening" of the criteria for a PTSD diagnosis, which, among other things, can now only be made by a licensed physician, where previously ratings techs could make such decisions and the Drs only "signed off" on the rating.
The VA says, and I don't doubt them on this, that a recent review of PTSD cases, especially among Vietnam vets, revealed an "unacceptable" level of phony claims, which was a reason for the changes.
15 - Martin Lav
Leave it to the VA to think that the preposterous high percentage of homeless people being Vietnam Vets to be some sort of phony claim. Ridiculous!
It reminds me of the old Jack Lemmon Walter Mathau movie the Apartment or was it something else, where Walter played the atty and Jack was the injured guy.....
Hmmm.....if only the US Gov't had better surveillance they could catch these phony Vets sleepy under a bridge, having a grand ol time pretending to be traumatized.....
Is it just me?
16 - Clavos
No, Martin, it's not you, it's me. I wasn't clear in my previous post.
What the VA was talking about had nothing to do with the homeless vets; they were addressing the issue of vets claiming PTSD, and they were blaming themselves for having accepted the claims without appropriate medical or psychiatric exams.
I doubt that a lot of the homeless vets are VA PTSD cases, as those vets get compensation sufficient to house, clothe, and feed themselves; and they get an allowance for home health care (usually by a spouse) or are hospitalized, as appropriate.
It's my understanding that most of the homeless vets aren't registered and have not been rated by the VA.
As multi-year VA patient myself, I do think the VA is getting much more of a bum rap than it deserves these days.
Most (but not all) of the negatives you've heard about in the MSM involve screwups in the service-run hospitals, not in the VA system, and often, the MSM itself confuses them.
17 - Al Barger
Oh holy crap, 44% of veterans in a two year old survey were dissatisfied with the response of the federal government to complaints of employment discrimination against veterans. Damn that BusHitler! We're going to heck in a handbasket. Heck, I tell you!
18 - Dave Nalle
You don't refute the stats about homeless veterans, so I presume you are somewhat aware of this epidemic?
Of course I am aware of it.
Or will you provide us with a contrary statistic that points to the democrats as the cause of this problem?
Not a statistic, but some basic facts. The neglect of the VA during the Clinton administration played a big role in this, but the root cause of the homeless vet problem is the difficulty of getting vets to agree to be treated for PTSD and other psychological disorders.
How about the outright refusal to diagnose PTSD to deny future benefits to our Veterans?
Do you have stats on this? I know several vets who have received treatment from the VA for PTSD and others who have refused it despite repeated attempts to get them counseling.
I'm sure you will say this is an "overused" diagnosis that designed to increase government bureaucracy and democratic pork programs as well?
Why would I say that? I had a great-uncle who committed suicide because of PTSD resulting from his experiences in WWI. One of my uncles had PTSD from his time as a forward observer in WWII. Battle Fatigue and PTSD has a history as a legitimate problem for veterans going back as long as there have been wars.
Dave
19 - handyguy
Very moving column in today's NY Times [local news section] about a returning Staten Island vet and his mother's battles with the system:
"A Soldier Home From War, and a Mother Fighting Hard"
20 - bliffle
Bad judgement haunts us, doesn't it?
We never seem to improve our judgement about either reducing war fever or even warring better. We humans create the conditions for war and then succumb so readily to the temptations of visiting violence on others that an interplanetary creature looking down on us would be justified in concluding that we are enthusiastic to attack, maim and kill. And having momentarily paused in the never-ending battles we discard the soldiers no longer of use in The Bigger War, The Longer War, are cast aside.
And then such interplanetary creatures might conclude that we are hopelessly unable to allow any peace anywhere and we are not worthy of salvation.
Perhaps a Preemptive strike would be called for.
21 - Clavos
@#19:
Very evocative opinion piece.
Somewhat light on facts, however.
22 - handyguy
Yeah, I'd call it more just a human-interest story. I don't think there's any political agenda as such.
23 - moonraven
Bliffle, A pre-emptive strike against us will not be necessary. We are already imploding, and before long will be under water. Fine with me.
"Fish gotta swin, birds gotta fly"....
24 - bliffle
"...but they don't last long if they try!"
(cf. Tom Lehrer, "Pollution")
25 - Dr Dreadful
Al Barger: "We're going to heck in a handbasket. Heck, I tell you!"
Would that be Heck, Oregon or Heck, West Virginia?