Watch update

I didn't end up getting the watch I said I was going to get. I decided that the blue faced Omega Seamaster would be a better choice. Here's a picture:




It's called the "Bond" watch because it is the one used in the last several Bond movies. (Bond wears Rolex in the books, but Rolex didn't want to pay for the placement.)

It's perfect. I think the blue goes better with everything than the black would have. This particular model has been discontiued by Omega, there is a new internal movement that they are using now. The watch in "Casino Royale" is slightly different. Obviously I'm a big Bond fan, IMO, the new Bond kicks ass.

This may well be the only automatic watch I ever own... but you never know...

Lead, follow, or get the f*** out of the way

The height of cowardice has to be the Representatives working towards this resolution against the troop buildup in Iraq, but who are unwilling to end the war. Here is my reasoning:

The Representatives are responsible for providing the funding for all government activities. They could end the war in Iraq in short order if they voted to stop funding it. They could do so in such a way that the military wouldn't end up getting screwed. And they could make their case very clear: that they are doing it to end the war and not because they don't "support the troops." I think the country would "get" that.

So any of the Reps that are saying they don't support the build-up because it won't work, or they think the war is already lost, but are not in support of cutting funding, are cowards. Senators don't control the money but they could call for a cut in the funding. They lack the courage of their convictions. If you truly believe that the war is lost, then how can you not force an end to it? You are sending troops to fight and possibly die in a war you believe to be lost, when you could stop it!

This leads me to one of only two conclusions: either you don't believe the war is lost and you are only saying that because it's what your party is telling you to say; or you do believe the war is lost, you do believe that soldiers will die needlessly and you don't care as long as the policy can't be blamed on you.

Now I do think we can win. I do think it's important for us to win. I think there are only two ways we can fail. One is that the Iraqi government can't function and the Iraqi people choose to fight against each other rather than embrace freedom and democracy. We can't control that, but I am proud to have been (and possibly be again) part of giving them that opportunity. The second way we can fail is by giving up, which is what the left is in real danger of doing. I don't see how success is possible when half of our leaders are predicting failure.

As a Soldier, I don't really want to go back to Iraq if failure is the expected result. Talk about a real bummer. "Go risk your life for us, troop. We know you will fail, but we don't care as long as we can blame your failure on someone else."

I disagree with the people who say we will fail. But I have a lot of respect for those Representatives who think the war is lost and are calling for cutting funding for the war. Because they are willing to make a decision, state it clearly and back it up with action.

I think this is why Bush has maintained support of the military for so long. We respect decision makers, people who have to make the call, much more than the people who stand on the sidelines and nitpick. I've been the guy who has to make the unpopular decision. I've had to stand in front of the platoon and announce that we are working on Sunday, or working all night or running another convoy to Baghdad. Obviously not on the same scale as taking a nation to war, but I have more respect and sympathy for Bush than a civilian might because of this experience. Bush was the guy who was on the spot after 9/11, he had to make the call.

So I would like to see our leaders take a stand. If you are going to send more troops in, then do it with the intention of winning. If you don't believe we can win then bring all the troops home. We need leaders, unfortunately all we have are politicians.

Not very fired up

I'm not really in a ranting mood lately so I haven't been posting. But I thought this was funny. It's going around on email, good times.

WOULDN'T IT BE GREAT TO TURN ON THE TV AND HEAR ANY U.S. PRESIDENT, DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN GIVE THE FOLLOWING SPEECH?

My Fellow Americans: As you all know, the defeat of Iraq regime has been completed. Since congress does not want to spend any more money on this war, our mission in Iraq is complete.

This morning I gave the order for a complete removal of all American forces from Iraq. This action will be complete within 30 days. It is now to begin the reckoning.

Before me, I have two lists. One list contains the names of countries which have stood by our side during the Iraq conflict. This list is short. The United Kingdom, Spain, Bulgaria, Australia, and Poland are some of the countries listed there.

The other list contains everyone not on the first list. Most of the world's nations are on that list. My press secretary will be distributing copies of both lists later this evening.

Let me start by saying that effective immediately, foreign aid to those nations on List 2 ceases immediately and indefinitely. The money saved during the first year alone will pretty much pay for the costs of the Iraqi war.

The American people are no longer going to pour money into third world Hell-holes and watch those government leaders grow fat on corruption.
Need help with a famine? Wrestling with an epidemic? Call France.

In the future, together with Congress, I will work to redirect this money toward solving the vexing social problems we still have at home. On that note, a word to terrorist organizations. Screw with us and we will hunt you down and eliminate you and all your friends from the face of the earth.

Thirsting for a gutsy country to terrorize? Try France, or maybe China.
I am ordering the immediate severing of diplomatic relations with France, Germany, and Russia. Thanks for all your help, comrades. We are retiring from NATO as well. Bon chance, mes amis.

I have instructed the Mayor of New York City to begin towing the many UN diplomatic vehicles located in Manhattan with more than two unpaid parking tickets to sites where those vehicles will be stripped, shredded and crushed. I don't care about whatever treaty pertains to this. You creeps have tens of thousands of unpaid tickets. Pay those tickets tomorrow or watch you're precious Benzes, Bimmers and limos be turned over to some of the finest chop shops in the world. I love New York

A special note to our neighbors. Canada is on List 2. Since we are likely to be seeing a lot more of each other, you folks might want to try not pissing us off for a change.

Mexico is also on List 2. President Fox and his entire corrupt government really need an attitude adjustment. I will have a couple extra tank and infantry divisions sitting around. Guess where I am going to put em? Yep, border security. So start doing something with your oil.

Oh, by the way, the United States is abrogating the NAFTA Treaty - starting now.

We are tired of the one-way highway. Immediately, we'll be drilling for oil in Alaska - which will take care of this country's oil needs for decades to come. If you're an environmentalist who opposes this decision, I refer you to List 2 above: pick a country and move there. They care.

It is time for America to focus on its own welfare and its own citizens. Some will accuse us of isolationism. I answer them by saying, "darn tootin."

Nearly a century of trying to help folks live a decent life around the world has only earned us the undying enmity of just about everyone on the planet. It is time to eliminate hunger in America. It is time to eliminate homelessness in America. It is time to eliminate World Cup Soccer from America. To the nations on List 1, A final thought. Thanks guys. We owe you and we won't forget.

To the nations on List 2, a final thought: You might want to learn to speak Arabic ..

God bless America. Thank you and good night.

If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you are reading it in English, thank a soldier.

Sacrifice

I have heard it said, more than once, that President Bush has failed to get the American people involved in the war. He hasn't asked the American people to make any sacrifices! Or so I have read in the paper and heard on the Sunday morning shows.

I don't really know what that means. Should Bush ask the folks to stop drinking alcohol for the duration of the war? Deployed Soldiers can't drink. How about collecting scrap metal or giving up silk like in World War 2? The fact is, we don't have shortages of war stocks. We don't need civilians to go and turn in their kevlar vests for use by the troops - feel free to keep yours!

Hollow gestures would be meaningless, so I don't know what these people want the president to ask for. There are, however, many people out there doing lots of things to help out. Not the least of whom are the Patriot Guard Riders, who attend the funerals of fallen servicemembers to protect and honor them. These guys are sacrificing personal time, they ask for no money, they just go out and do it. http://www.patriotguard.org/


How about the Wounded Warrior Project? They are trying to meet the needs of Soldiers wounded in Iraq and elsewhere. http://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/

I met a lady organizing a local community group support drive, she was collecting donations for "goodie boxes" to send to Soldiers overseas. I didn't think to ask her if President Bush had told her to do it.

While I was deployed I went and met Bruce Willis and Lee Ermey (the guy from "Mail Call"). While I was there Arnold Schwarzenegger came through and a bunch of bands and singers came over to entertain. Maybe Bush asked them, but I don't think so.

So again, I ask: what is it these people are waiting to be asked to do? If you want to help Soldiers, there are a bunch of ways to do so. If you want to make some kind of sacrifice, give some time to help out a local family support group for deployed Soldiers families.

If you are against the war, go out and work with a group trying to end it. I don't mind. As a Soldier, I probably want the war over more than you do. Protest if it makes you feel better, or volunteer to work for a political candidate that will work towards what you want. Better to work within the system to attain your goals, in my opinion.

Just don't forget that you can safely protest against the government here, and hundreds of millions of people in other parts of the world can't. Take a moment to appreciate that before you criticize this country to harshly.

And there is no need to thank us (unless you want to.)

The Surge

I didn't vote last time around. I vote in Montana, but I don't live there. As an active duty Solider I can maintain my residency there and live anywhere; and Montana doesn't charge people on active duty any state taxes, nice of them huh?

During mid-term elections it's hard for me to keep up with the races in Montana and I don't want to make an uninformed decision. So I usually don't vote in the mid-terms. There is a lot at stake right now, so I thought a lot about voting. But to be honest I don't think either side in this country has the right answers.

The first few paragraphs of this story sum up how I felt during the election, and why I felt like there were no good choices:

New York Times
January 11, 2007
Pg. 31

The Fog Over Iraq

By David Brooks
If the Democrats don’t like the U.S. policy on Iraq over the next six months, they have themselves partly to blame. There were millions of disaffected Republicans and independents ready to coalesce around some alternative way forward, but the Democrats never came up with anything remotely serious.

The liberals who favor quick exit never grappled with the consequences of that policy, which the Baker-Hamilton commission terrifyingly described. The centrists who believe in gradual withdrawal never explained why that wouldn’t be like pulling a tooth slowly. Joe Biden, who has the most intellectually serious framework for dealing with Iraq, was busy yesterday, at the crucial decision-making moment, conducting preliminary fact-finding hearings, complete with forays into Iraqi history.

The Democrats have been fecund with criticisms of the war, but when it comes to alternative proposals, a common approach is social Darwinism on stilts: We failed them, now they’re on their own.

So we are stuck with the Bush proposal as the only serious plan on offer.


End of quote.

I listened to the President's speech last night and I liked what I heard. I'm not optimistic about things working out the way we want them to in Iraq, but this seems like the best of a bunch of bad options. I want us to win. I think before you make up your mind about whether this is a good plan or a bad plan, you need to decide what you want.

Do you want us to win in Iraq or not? And what does that mean? We won the war in the first few months. We are in the process of trying to win the peace, not only for ourselves, but for the Iraqi people as well. And a free, peaceful Iraq is a very desirable long term goal. If we can make Iraq into another Saudi Arabia or Jordan (not perfect, but better than Syria), we will be safer here at home.

My question for the President, if I were given the opportunity to ask it, would be: Are we going to disband, or at least control, the militias? He answered several other concerns I had during the speech, he set a date for the Iraqis to take over their security, he said we are going to hold ground and keep the terrorists from coming back into cleared neighborhoods; among other things. This is good, but killing all the terrorists is not enough, we need to control the militias if Iraq is going to be peaceful.

I will go back to Iraq for another tour if I'm called, of course. But I don't want to go if the American people have already given up. We can kill bad guys all day long, but if they have the idea that they just have to wait and we will quit, then there is no chance for success. And our sacrifices will be in vain.

If you are one of those people who believe that our sacrifices have been in vain all along, then you need to get a grip on reality. Start paying attention to what's really going on and less attention to what celebrities are telling you. If you are still arguing whether we should have invaded in the first place you are wasting your time. You might as well argue whether we should have finished Saddam after the Gulf War in 1991, it's moot.

At least as far as this Soldier is concerned. The only question that matters is: do you want to win or not?