A Veteran's Day Letter to my Heroes...

I sit in the comfort of my home, watching the leaves fall outside with the rain. I am plotting my next batch of homemade bread and crockpot chili. I get caught up in the noise of the game on the tv. I watch my candles flicker and throw off comforting lights and scents. I am yet surrounded by boxes and an oven that still holds my quesadilla hostage, but I am safe and warm. I am at peace for a moment in the chaos that has been my life the last six weeks.

In this moment, as many others throughout my days and weeks, you are in my thoughts and prayers. The comforts of MRE's; the safety of makeshift housing, the scent of close quarters with many others fill my thoughts. I can only imagine from the stories passed on to me. The long flights in moving home; the chats with co-workers getting ready for deployment to relieve those who have stood fast for a year or more. To those stateside who are standing fast; for those who are home; for those who are still overseas; for those who are transitioning, I send my heartfelt thanks for your services. Words cannot convey my true appreciation for all of you and all you do. Be safe; be well. You are loved.

*hugs*
miss b

Quest for Knowledge: Rules of Engagement - Then and Now

All the fluff floating around about Viet Nam being relived in the Sandbox and of course, my dislike of the person in LA who gave me cause to light my keyboard up last night have me thinking about this...

I've got the Rules of Endangerment (Courtesy of Blackfive via Just the Average Savage - very insightful look). I also have a sample ROE from several operations condensed into one area. This I've been reading; studying, trying to understand and make sense from a civilian significant other view. I grasp the basic concept of trying to keep collateral damage to a minimum. I understand and appreciate the "courtesy" of the American Soldier (Soldier used as a generic term for Sailors, Marines, Airmen and Soldiers - but certainly not meant to imply casuality or offend any Service member from any branch) but I'm not sure I comprehend. How can we be a power Military if we do not use that power to our advantage? We have technology, intelligence, more extensively educated recruits than we did back when it was mostly hand-to-hand, close range skirmishes of young guys yanked right out of high school with no desire to further educate themselves at the time. Do we really want to be known as the "nice guys"? If our hands are so tied that we can't go in and kick some insurgency ass, are they going to know we mean business? Don't get me wrong - I support the Heroes deployed, redeployed, held over and I do it proudly. I do it with the knowledge that I have known some Heroes who've passed on and I'm sadly aware that there may be more. I want to know why we can't prevent a few more Heroes from being killed by creating a little more turmoil from reducing requirements of the ROE?

I want to know what the Rules of Engagement were back when Viet Nam and WWII were going on. I'm not old enough to remember, nor was I a part of it, but I'm pretty sure there is a difference. I know there are certainly discrepancies in the stories I hear from back then to the reports I read and watch today. Has our military changed this much? Is there really that much more red tape holding our Heroes back from doing what they need to win this objective?

I've been searching, (and searching and searching!) and I'm thinking the best place to go for the information is the people who were in during those times.

Do the ROE change with each war? Did WWII have different ones from Viet Nam different from Bosnia different from OIF/OEF? Who decides the ROE? People behind a desk, or the ones on the front lines who KNOW what's out there?

Give me reason to believe why we have this weaponry, technology and these skilled servicemembers. Help me understand the difference between then and now.

L. A. Times Apocalypse again -- call up the Vietnam vets...

L A Times Apocalypse again -- call up the Vietnam vets Where else can Bush get 21,500 trained soldiers for his 'surge'? By Paul Whitefield, PAUL WHITEFIELD supervises the editorial pages' copy desk.

January 21, 2007

LISTENING TO President Bush's speech on Iraq earlier this month, my first thought was: "Where the heck are we going to get 21,500 more soldiers to send to Iraq?" Our Reserves are depleted, our National Guard is worn out, our Army and Marine Corps are stretched to the limit.

Then it hit me: Re-up our Vietnam War veterans and send them.

They're trained. They're battle-hardened. Many already have post-traumatic stress disorder. Also, some have their own vehicles — Harleys mostly, which are cheap to run, make small targets and are highly mobile. I'll even bet that lots of these guys still have guns (you know, just in case).

OK, some vets are a bit long in the tooth (or don't have teeth — because of Agent Orange?). Or their eyesight isn't what it was. Or their reflexes have slowed. But with today's modern weaponry, how well do you have to see?

Too out of shape, you say? Listen, if Rocky Balboa can step back into the ring at age 60, all these Vietnam War vets need is a little boot-camp magic and they'll be good to go. I mean, who doesn't want to drop a few pounds?

Don't want geezers fighting for us? Well, let's face it, our young people have greater value right here. Most of us want to retire and collect our hard-earned Social Security, and we need those youngsters here, working and paying taxes — lots of taxes.

Finally, these Vietnam War guys are hungry for revenge. After all, they fought in the only war the U.S. ever lost. And they didn't even get a parade. So this is their chance. We can throw them that big parade when they come marching home.

If you would like to make a comment about a specific news article, editorial or commentary and have it considered for publication in the newspaper as a Letter to the Editor, please send it to letters@latimes.com -- send well-written individual letters only; no group e-mails. Do not send attachments. (Letters regarding Orange County issues specifically should be sent to ocletters@latimes.com.) Letters should be brief, and may be edited. They become the property of The Times and may be republished in any format. Please include your full name, mailing address and daytime phone number (your number will not be published). For complete guidelines, call (800) LATIMES, Ext. 74511.

In response to the 21 Jan 2007 editorial piece in the LA Times by Paul Whitefield, all I can say is "Oh HEEELLLLLL No!!!"

First the Pakistani national "man" (I use that term loosely) in WI from Discount-Mats.com, and now this. Unbelievable. And one of our own, even.

I know nothing of Mr Whitefield except that he is affiliated with the LA Times on the editorial page. I've read only one article with his name on it. I shall be hard-pressed to read anything else written by him.

I have no way of knowing whether Mr Whitefield wrote that column in jest. It does not matter. It was inappropriate and condescending, at best. And yes, I'm well aware that he is protected under the First Amendment to write whatever he wishes. (Hey, Whitefield -- guess who protects {protected} that Amendment for you? Yep, those Viet Nam vets, others before/after them and today's Military.)

Here's a thought -- how about exercising the Fifth Amendment? You know, the one that gives us the right to shut the hell up? He may have thought he was being humorous; to the ignorant masses, he probably was. Did the Viet Nam Vets not get enough ignorance and heartbreak the first time around? Must they be knocked down again for doing what they were commissioned? They fought for this country, regardless of their personal feelings, and upheld their commitment to the USA. All gave some, Some gave all. Many were drafted, didn't even WANT to go and STILL performed their duties as required when others ran, hid and dodged.

"'Well, let's face it, our young people have greater value right here. Most of us want to retire and collect our hard-earned Social Security, and we need those youngsters here, working and paying taxes — lots of taxes.'"

Really? Why not just slap every Soldier, Marine, Sailor, Airman, Coastie, Reservist and National Guardsman currently serving or who has ever served right across the face after spitting on them? I'm sure everyone in our Service would love to retire and collect their hard-earned Social Security. So would their families. It's sad that not all of them were or will be able. I could be wrong, but I'd wager that one day in Viet Nam (or the Sandbox, or Normandy or [insert war/incident/operation here]) might be just a tad more difficult than one day behind a keyboard at a newspaper office. Paper cuts can be quite painful; sniper fire, IED's or fallout from Agent Orange-deadly. Just because they are Veterans does NOT mean they are useless. Far from it. Because of previous Vets, I grew up:

-in a country free from fear of happenings such as 9/11
-free to choose a faith different from my neighbor's
-free to say what I want about the government I voted for without fear of tyranny
-free to vote
-free to talk, dress, live as I please
(catchin' a theme here?) Freedom... It's a beautiful thing, brought to us courtesy of:

DA DA DAAAAA --- Veterans. All of them. From every war/incident/operation. Upholding the freedoms the Constitution of this great nation affords us. Including Viet Nam.

Did Mr Whitefield serve in the Military? Did he do his duty beside those Brothers in any branch of the Military? Did he even sign up as a Reservist? Was he a Viet Nam Vet? Only a yes to the final question would earn him the right to even speak of them, much less joke about them. A yes to any of the prior three would surprise me greatly. Even Kerry had being a Veteran to fall back on after insulting our Heroes; that didn't excuse him. I may be reaching here, but without a Military, our country would cease to exist freely. Without a newspaper editorial employee -- ehh, not so much. Man, I LOVE that First Amendment!!! (You know, the one those DA DA DAAAA--- Vets and current Heroes work so hard to protect?)

This country used to take more pride in it's Military. Now, many are laissez faire about it. That's alright. This granddaughter and daughter of Veterans has enough to go around. And there are quite a few more out there just like me. I suspect you'll be hearing from them as well.

We must learn from the Heroes of the past and support the Heroes of the present to remain a free nation in the future. Mr Whitefield, to you I say at least I hope you are grateful to have the freedom (which, by the way-NOT free) to write what you wish, no matter how offensive. To all our Heroes past and present (absolutely including those Viet Nam Veterans), THANK YOU.