Here are letters sent to the Editor of the Stars and Stripes - What do Military Personnel and Their Familes Think 13 April thru 11 May 04
Date: Tue, 11 May 2004

Stick with reading these to understand that there is a volcano swelling under the earth where these military and their family trod.


13 APRIL

Thanks, Secretary Rumsfeld

I’d like to extend a hearty thank you to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for the pending 120-day extension of our troops in Iraq. After all, what’s 120 days, really? For our family, it’s four birthdays (again), Mother’s Day and Father’s Day (again), our wedding anniversary (again), and the Fourth of July, which is what service is all about for a lot of military families.

I thank Secretary Rumsfeld for all of his talk about not overburdening families and soldiers. One year of their lives on the line, worrying daily about their safety, couldn’t possibly be enough to “overburden” us.

Thanks from our children, who apparently don’t need a father present, who cry when Mommy’s time is not enough for the four of them, who were counting the days until Daddy could hold them on his lap.

Thanks for betraying our trust by telling us one year “boots on the ground” and changing it at your discretion. Thanks for making the small percentage who agree with this sound like the majority. Thanks for not sending help in the form of more troops last spring when soldiers were dying, but keeping our soldiers there for extra time this spring.

Thanks for the lies you spew about how things are not so bad and we don’t need more troops, all the while keeping 1st Armored Division troops there. You’re obviously saying one thing and doing another. Thanks for using the excuse of these troops’ experience to do so. When they kept control last year, they went in with the same experience as the new units have now. Thanks for not bothering to come to Germany, face the family members, answer our questions and put faces with your numbers.

The next thank you should come from President Bush this November, when John Kerry is elected president because of the lies Secretary Rumsfeld told. The final thanks will be from whoever has to rebuild our Army’s strength when my husband and many others refuse to re-enlist.

I support our troops. I love my husband. We should not have to choose the Army or family. We should be able to trust that we can have Army and family.

Jessica Moretz
Giessen, Germany

Supports troops, not mission

I just read the article “Dempsey: Logical for 1st AD to stay in Iraq” (April 9). I take issue with Maj. Gen. Martin Dempsey saying that, “Moreover, the division’s soldiers and their families have invested too much, made too many personal sacrifices in support of this mission, to see it risked at such a critical time.”

As a family member, an American, and a spouse of a currently deployed soldier with the 1st Armored Division, I have never supported this mission. I have always supported our troops. I have always supported the Afghanistan mission, which seems to have taken a distant backseat at the moment. The Iraq mission was a farce from the beginning, created by a right wing, egocentric group called the Bush administration.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney have been dreaming for decades of a pre-emptive strike. That’s their philosophy. The problem I see with taking pre-emptive measures is that if your intelligence isn’t rock solid, you run the risk of striking the wrong place at the wrong time for the wrong reasons. Unfortunately, America “elected” the perfect puppet for them to carry out their dream. They abused Americans’ renewed trust in our government by using the backdrop of the Sept. 11, 2001, tragedies.

I’ll never accept any reason for the Bush administration’s decision to snow Congress and the American public with their inaccurate information regarding Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. That was an incredibly cruel thing to do to all of us. I remember how terrified we all were when our troops were sent in there with their gas masks. I say shame on our present administration.

If this mission fails, let it be a lesson to our country and to the world that we’ve all heard before — pride comes before a fall. Our way of life is not the right way everywhere simply because we believe it should be. We have seen countless examples where this belief has failed throughout history. In fact, our government can be blamed for several of these examples.

The current administration has allowed far too many troops to be injured and killed already because of their lies and disinformation, and for that they should pay dearly. Saddam Hussein was a harsh dictator, but he certainly knew how to keep order in his country. We had absolutely no business going to Iraq when we did. It appears to me that we haven’t the slightest idea how to get out now, and that’s not the fault of our hard-working, overextended troops.

I know where the blame lays, and they’ve cried “wolf!” too many times now for me to believe a thing they say. So I say to Maj. Gen. Dempsey, in the future, if you think you speak for all family members, please think again, sir.

Paula Gaskell
Hanau, Germany

Let them come home

My name is Hollie Mitchell. I’m the wife of a soldier in the 1st Armored Division, 1-501 Aviation, stationed in Iraq. We’re based out of Hanau, Germany. My husband was due to come home next week after serving a year in Iraq. He was on his way home when his unit was told to turn around and go back to Iraq.

After a year of nervous waiting and living without my husband, we’ve been looking forward to April 2004 with great anticipation. He left for Iraq on April 29, 2003. We were told he could be gone for 365 days. The welcome home parties have all been planned, and some of the troops from the unit are already back in Germany. I am four months pregnant, a gift my husband left for us when he was on rest and recuperation leave in December. Now I’ve been told at the last minute that the day I’ve been looking forward to for a year was just a tease.

This is the kind of reward the Army is giving its soldiers and family members. They have ripped our hearts out. We have given up a year of our lives and were expecting to be with our loved ones this month. Instead, they slap us in the face and tell us it will be up to another 120 days, which they think sounds better than four more months.

These soldiers have lived in substandard living conditions, put their lives on the line every day and been separated from their families for a year now. It’s time to return them home. They have replacements in Iraq. They’re very tired and worn out, mentally and physically. They need to come home. Morale is at an all- time low.

Imagine being separated from one’s family for a year and living under great stress. Then a week before returning, on the way home, you’re told that you’ll be staying for another four months. That’s a total of 16 months away, working under very high stress levels every day of that 16 months, except for two weeks of rest and recuperation. This is irrational to ask of anyone, let alone the men and women who serve this country.

The children who were expecting their fathers home are now crying and wondering where they are. The wives, husbands, sons, daughters, mothers, and fathers were all expecting them home. The soldiers were expecting to come home. Let them come home.

Publicity is the only thing that politicians listen to. We can’t sit and be quiet and take this laying down. The promises have to stop being broken. President Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld have to start living up to their word. They said our troops would be home in a year. Now they’ve changed that to 16 months. When is this going to end?

Hollie Mitchell
Hanau, Germany

14 APRIL



Extension is absurd

My husband has been in the Army for 17 years, and I’ve been proud of that because we’ve done a lot of good things in many ways. We never regretted any place that Army life has taken us because we knew our job and our place in the Army world. My husband has been in many other places, and we’ve always stood side by side. But the extension of the deployment of 1st Armored Division soldiers in Iraq is absurd.

I cried for an entire day after getting the news of the extension of the soldiers in Iraq. Now I have to laugh knowing that everywhere we look, we don’t see any welcome home banners anymore. Now we see crisis and anger management banners. Everything was supposed to be happiness. Now it’s sadness, and still they pretend we are calm, happy families, like what just happened is nothing but part of the soldiers’ jobs. They forget that these same soldiers are fathers, mothers, sons, brothers and sisters, and have done their jobs in Iraq. Now it’s time for them to come home!

There’s not going to be any sweet, beautiful answer that anyone can give my two children to make them understand why. Why is daddy not coming home? My kids are going to think that their daddy is not coming home because they did something bad. That’s what a lot of other children will be thinking while they are crying at night.

For a year my children and many other kids all marked off each day on the calender, hoping that each day that went by would be one day sooner that their fathers would be home. A lot of people’s dreams and plans were shattered once again.

As a proud Army wife, I think there’s no fairness in any of this. I don’t expect miracles to happen. But if a lot of we spouses raise our voices together, maybe we can do something to bring ours husbands, fathers, mothers, sons and brothers back home where they belong after a yearlong deployment. I am a very proud and angry wife and mother.

Lorna I. Soto
Baumholder, Germany

Bring ‘Old Ironsides’ home

I’ve been following, with great interest and for very personal reasons, the recent “possible extension” of 1st Armored Division soldiers in Iraq. My husband is in Company B, 1st Battalion, 37th Armored Regiment, and is currently attached to the 1st Battalion, 36th Infantry Regiment. He has not been home during his entire deployment. He left on May 10, 2003, and I’ve only seen him since then via Webcam or pictures.

I’m sick and tired of the lies and deceptions slathered over everyone who is even remotely connected to this division. In the story “Dempsey: Logical for 1st AD to stay in Iraq” (April 9), Maj. Gen. Martin Dempsey said, “Moreover, the division’s soldiers and their families have invested too much, made too many personal sacrifices in support of this mission, to see it risked at such a critical time.” Well excuse me, Maj. Gen. Dempsey, but I’d prefer you not speak for me in the future!

Dempsey got one thing right: my husband and I have invested too much during this deployment. Now I want to cash in that investment and reap the benefits. I want my husband home now. I don’t want to hear about how logical Dempsey or the Army may think it is to keep the 1st AD in Iraq. Logic hasn’t been part of the equation since day one. Let’s not break tradition. For that matter, how “logical” can it be to push soldiers to their absolute limit and then expect them to be at peak performance? And don’t give me that line about these soldiers being trained for this. I’m a veteran myself.

In my opinion, Dempsey has not exercised much logic at all. He prematurely ended the rest and recuperation program, and now he’s trying to insinuate that the 1st AD can contribute more than, say, the 101st Airborne Division, whose troops have been allowed to redeploy back to their families. The 3rd Infantry Division wasn’t even kept in Iraq for more than a year. As a matter of fact, tours in Vietnam weren’t even more than 12 months. Even back then the Army knew it would be detrimental to GIs’ mental stability to be in a combat environment for more than a year.

I don’t care that President Bush has called an end to major combat. Any one of the wives of 1st AD soldiers knows otherwise. Our spouses have almost done their “365 days boots on the ground.” This is not now nor has it ever been a tank war. It’s time to bring “Old Ironsides” home.

Katheryn Chavarria
Bad Nauheim, Germany

Enough is enough

I have a son who joined the Army a year ago and a husband who’s been in for 17 years, and both of them are in Iraq with the 1st Armored Division. I also have a 7-year-old daughter, and she can’t understand why she has to keep waiting for her brother and father to come home.

I understand very well my husband’s responsibilities. But enough is enough. This is not about our freedom or terrorism. It’s about politics. I know that there are a lot of spouses who feel the same way I do, but they’re afraid to speak up. But you know what? I’m very proud of my son and my husband, and I’ll do whatever it takes to bring them back home.

Ermelinda Navarro
Baumholder, Germany

15 APRIL



In the presence of courage

I’ll never forget a sobering moment at the field hospital near Baghdad International Airport.

“Why don’t they turn up the air conditioning in these tents?” I’d been feeling pretty sorry for myself until the medics wheeled in a young military policeman lying on a gurney. He’d just lost a hand. A barely noticeable amount of blood was still seeping through the gauze bandage placed over what was left of his arm. Unable to speak and barely conscious after surgery, he stared blankly at our nurse, a worldly major who was struggling to hold back tears. I could see her eyes beginning to well up as she looked down at the wounded GI, a man young enough to be her son.

The major barked orders at her lieutenants in an attempt to conceal her feelings. Then she turned to him. “Where are you from, specialist?” He muttered something I couldn’t understand. “Really? Well, I’m from Puerto Rico. Do you have kids at home?” He nodded. She took a picture of her granddaughter out of her wallet and showed it to him. He gazed at the picture of the little girl and tried to mutter something. “Don’t … I know … just relax. You’ll be OK. Now just try to get some sleep.”

The MP now seemed to realize where he was and what had happened. He stared in horror at his bandaged arm. He was too proud to say anything. To avoid the sight of his mutilated limb, he fixed his eyes instead on the swaying lamp above him. I was in the sacred presence of a courageous man.

The major turned to her colleague and whispered, “He’ll need more [morphine] later, and I want you to call me around 1300. Make sure they watch the IV. I’ll be going over the Medevacs with the colonel.”

“Yes, ma’am,” responded a shockingly young strawberry blonde. A second lieutenant, she looked as if she had just graduated from nursing school. But she possessed a timeless wisdom beyond her years — and mine as well.

Leaning down over the wounded soldier’s cot, she put her hand on his forehead and ran her fingers slowly through his brown hair. At once he became calm. The fear in his eyes had disappeared. The young woman smiled at him and he smiled back. They communicated only with their eyes for several minutes. She sat down on a steel chair beside his cot and stayed with him until he fell asleep.

Wiping her eyes with the back of her hand, the young officer rose from the chair and approached my cot. “Do you need anything, sergeant?” she asked me. “No, ma’am, except perhaps a kick in the ass.” She winked at me, smiled knowingly and went on to the next patient.

None of us in that tent spoke a word for what seemed like an hour. I was filled with self-loathing. This young lieutenant, the medical corps personnel and the patient in their charge had seen and endured more in their short lives than I had in my 51 years.

Sgt. 1st Class Francis R. Schwartz
Heidelberg, Germany

Separation pay denial unfair

I’ve been stationed at Camp Arifjan, Kuwait, for four months now. The hardest part of this deployment is being away from my son. I’m sure this is true for all servicemembers serving away from their children. I’m divorced, and I share joint custody with my ex-wife. She’s the primary custodian.

I was just informed today that I’m not entitled to family separation pay because I’m not the primary caretaker. Does this mean I miss my child less than a parent who is not divorced? I think not! How does the Army even begin to justify this? For a father who has always tried to fulfill his parental obligations, this is yet another slap in the face to a divorced male. And for me, it’s another reason not to re-up once my commitment here is through.

Staff Sgt. Steve Snowden
Camp Arifjan, Kuwait

16 APRIL



Joke is on America

When President Bush was making jokes to the News Correspondents Association about his inability to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, he was not making a joke on himself, as the Bush lovers would have us believe, the joke he was making was on America.

Over 600 American lives lost and the commander in chief thinks it’s a joke.

Thousands more Americans wounded, many with lost limbs, and the commander in chief thinks it’s a joke.

At least 10,000 Iraqis who had nothing to do with 9/11 attacks on America have been killed, all because of the president’s WMD claims, and the commander in chief thinks it’s a joke.

The joke’s on us, America, and Halliburton is laughing all the way to the bank. The joke’s on us, America, and bin Laden’s laughter is echoing throughout the caves of Afghanistan; after all, we destroyed his second most hated enemy, Saddam, and then opened up Iraq for bin Laden’s terrorists to terrorize the Iraqi people and attack our forces. The joke’s on us, America, because this president said that he would never negotiate with a murdering terrorist dictator, yet negotiate he did, with the murdering terrorist dictator Moammar Gadhafi, the same Gadhafi who killed hundreds of Americans in a number of terrorist attacks.

The joke’s on us, America, the president was only joking about WMDs in Iraq, he’s now saying that the real reason for going to war in Iraq was to bring freedom and democracy to the Iraqi people.

Americans know that democracy is the best form of government, but most Americans are smart enough to know that nationalism makes it difficult to force democracy on a people. Nationalism will make a people fight an occupation army no matter how good the intentions of the occupiers are, and no matter how much money the occupiers spend.

America’s resolve is strong, and America does have a successful history as an occupation army, but a closer look will show that an occupation is only successful when the occupiers are invited in, or when nearly all the men and boys of fighting age of the occupied country are annihilated. This was the case in the successful occupations of Germany and Japan after World War II.

The joke’s on us, America, and even the Bush-lovers fell for it. It turns out the Saddam did give up his WMDs, but not because of anything that Bush did, but because of the actions of former President Clinton. Actions that didn’t get one American servicemember killed.

Re-electing these guys would be the mother of all jokes, and the joke will be on us, America.

James Carrethers
Heidelberg, Germany

18 APRIL



We need them back

I don’t have any questions regarding the extension of our soldiers because I am speechless.

Right now I'm praying for guidance and understanding. I need wisdom to help me deal with this extension.

Almost a year has passed and I have had to take care of my family as if I were a widow. The pain and loneliness make me feel this way. I am not the only one, but I have noticed that it is more difficult because I have two teenagers and a 6-year-old.

My little one has been drawing pictures of crying people. “This is Dad and this is me and we cry because we don’t have each other,” she explains.

She has been crossing out the days on our calendar. How can I explain the new decision to her? Should I say, “Oh no, dear ... we have to add 120 more little squares to the calendar and THAT is when Daddy will back ... if he comes.”

I am a proud military wife. I support our troops, but a year is more than enough. It has been a year of sleepless nights and pain because we don’t know if they are coming back. We never now what is going to happen next.

We ran out of explanations for our children. Our husbands went to Iraq to help the people, but what about us? What about the emotional support that the wives and children need?

Yes, they joined the Army and they have to serve. That is their job, and of course my husband is proud of his job and how he represents the U.S. armed forces. Please understand my point: After a year, we need them back!

Ivette Torres
Baumholder, Germany

Get out and vote

I have just read letters from the very disappointed wives whose husbands will be extended for another 120 days in country in Iraq.

Ladies, as the daughter of a 20-year Navy man, a former WAC and the wife of a 30-year Navy man, I can empathize. My husband did Vietnam repeatedly from 1969 until the last load of boat people floated out.

However, you all have to realize that these types of decisions are made by men who are out of touch with the reality of day-to-day life of the serviceperson and his/her family. Our husbands are not people, they are materiel needed to meet an objective.

Unfortunately, this objective happens to be the re-election of Bush II and the enrichment of his cronies at Halliburton. I think we did something good in Afghanistan. Iraq is just an exercise in pique for the First Cheerleader. Unfortunately, his snit is costing the lives of our young people.

If you want to change things now and for the future of your husbands and this country, vote! Read every newspaper you can get you hands on. Go on line and read the English editions of the foreign press, including Al-Jazeera and Al Arabia. I do not support what the Arab press is saying. But how better to fight your enemy than to know everything you can about how he thinks?

Get out there, organize fellow wives, write letters to your elected representatives, register to vote, organize drives to help get military family members who are eligible to register. Remind people to get their absentee ballots. Jeb Bush may have been able to steal the election once for his brother and get away with it. However, if it happens again, we as a country are getting just what we deserve — a corrupt administration elected by a corrupted system because of an apathetic and lazy electorate.

Ladies, we will only be treated as badly as we allow ourselves to be treated. Our husbands have a duty to perform. So do we. We need to make every effort to be informed citizens who vote and participate in the political process. Let the professional politicians know that we are watching and we are voting.

Patricia Wilson
DeBary, Fla.

22 APRIL



Time to come home

A month after I found out I was pregnant, I found out my husband was being deployed to Iraq for a year.

During the first six months of the deployment I had almost every pregnancy complication you could think of, one being that my water broke at 25 weeks. I was put in the hospital for three miserable, lonely weeks. My water finally sealed itself enough for me to be released home on bed rest. I ended up having to go to the States.

I had my baby a month later, on Sept. 20, four weeks early. I was thrilled to find out all my doctors’ worries that my baby would be born deformed were wrong. He was small but perfect. My husband was shocked when he called my mother and she told him he had a son.

When my son turned 3 months old, I find out that he had a neuroblastoma, a type of cancer that forms tumors all over the body and that, in most cases, is found after the cancer is terminal.

A week and a half after we found out, they had the baby scheduled for emergency surgery. I had sent a Red Cross message to my husband the day I found out, but he had only received it when I gave him the dispatch number and he had them look. They told him that someone had received it a few days before and had forgotten to give it to him. Luckily, my husband made it home in time to see our son before they put him to sleep.

The surgery went very well and last month they released us to come back to Germany to be treated here so we could be home when my husband returned. We got in the day before they extended them.

My son cries every day for his dad. He’s been through a lot for only being 29 weeks old. He only wants to be around his daddy and I can’t give him that. I understand, somewhat, why my husband’s being extended, but my son and all the other children don’t. The guys are tired and worn out and just want to be home with their families. I’m just one of the many people wanting our soldiers, husbands, wives, brothers, sisters, mommies and daddies home. I’m very proud of my husband, but it’s time he comes home.

Jessica Bailey
Bumholder, Germany

23 APRIL



Iraq getting out of control

Throughout the past four years I’ve been an avid supporter of the Bush administration. I’ve always been a conservative Republican. But the events of the past few weeks are making me somewhat feel that it’s time for a change.

It came out recently that an August 2001 memo said Osama bin Laden was plotting against the United States. The whole Iraq situation is getting out of control. Why don’t we just pick up and go home? We’ve been there more than a year now. Are we still hoping to find the elusive weapons of mass destruction? It’s really getting out of hand down there, and we’re losing more and more lives with each passing day.

After reading the news about the 1st Armored Division, I was quite saddened. These soldiers have given us enough over the past year. How many birthdays and anniversaries were missed? How many soldiers could not return home due to the death of an immediate family member? How many lives have they sacrificed already? I have a great amount of respect for 1st AD soldiers. I’d like to thank every single one of them, but I think it’s time for them to come home. If I could, I’d volunteer to go to Iraq so that one of them may return home. Perhaps some lucky father could be home for the birth of a new child or someone could get to hold and hug his children for the first time in a year.

I am prior active duty Air Force, and I know that the treatment is different between Army and Air Force. Air Force members are the spoiled, whiny, white-collar brats of the military who complain about anything and everything. Army members continually get the short end of the stick and are expected to just “suck it up and shut up.”

I still have a great amount of respect for the Bush administration. I just hope it considers re-evaluating the extension of troops who have already been in Iraq one year or more. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld should put himself in the soldiers’ place and think what it would be like to be on his way home and then be extended for an unknown number of days. This will do nothing but hurt the mission, as the morale of 1st AD soldiers will certainly suffer because of this. Wouldn’t we be stronger with fresh troops who haven’t been down there? I pray that the soldiers in Iraq will all return home safe and soon.

Jeffrey S. Bode
Spangdahlem Air Base, Germa

26 APRIL



Extension an injustice

I want to express my feelings and thoughts about this entire new situation with my husband. It’s been a year since he deployed to a foreign country to liberate the people of Iraq. Now that it’s time for him to return, his unit has been extended. It’s an injustice for him and all the men and women who have served for an entire year to stay there while a new division has been mobilized there.

These soldiers are tired and desperate, and their morale is in the ground. They just want to come home and be reunited with their loved ones. I know this is his duty, but he already served his time in Iraq, and it’s time to return. Our soldiers need to be liberated as well as the people who they went to Iraq to set free.

I just hope for our soldiers’ safe return, and that someone with integrity and understanding will make them come home now.

Dannette Rodriguez
Baumholder, Germany

28 APRIL



Promise in the dark

The unit I’m assigned to has just been informed that we’ve been extended once again. We were 48 to 96 hours away from flying home after being in Kuwait and Iraq for almost exactly one year. I’ve served our country and the Army for 26 years. It would have been 35 years except that I took a nine-year break in service. I’ve seen 13 months in the demilitarized zone in Korea with the 2nd Infantry Division, a one-year tour of duty in Vietnam with the 196th Light Infantry Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division, and 35 months in Germany with the 3rd Infantry Division when the Berlin Wall was still dividing that country.

My main concern and outrage is that our coalition leadership has waited this long to attempt to take control of Fallujah and the other hot spots in Iraq. Months ago when numerous attacks began on our aviation units, motor transport units and others, I said this was what needed to be done to take control of those towns and root out the enemy.

It seems to me that we evidently have no general staff officers in the coalition forces of a higher echelon who served in Vietnam. If there are, they more than likely were in the rear echelon and saw action only from a stool in a bar on Tu Do Street in Saigon. The lives of too many good people have been lost on both sides because of the inaction of those who could have taken action months ago.

I also place the blame on the Pentagon and the Department of Defense, which more than 20 years ago said that we could afford to close military bases, downsize the military, and still handle two separate conflicts throughout the world successfully. Which one of them should get the biggest slice of humble pie to eat?

Those leaders who could have taken action before now who wear the Vietnam Service Ribbon and Vietnam Campaign Medal should strip themselves of them, because they have evidently forgotten. I haven’t! For my part, I just hope that the nightmares and the crawling out of bed stalking my prey while still sound asleep, causing my wife to worry about my sanity, don’t return.

On all of my past tours of duty, myself and others were informed of when we’d return home to our families. This tour of duty was promised to be only 365 days in country. My unit has done 359 days as of this writing. This has been just another promise in the dark. May God have mercy on us, as he’s the only one right now who probably will.

Staff Sgt. Walter Larsen
Camp Virginia, Kuwait

Chinks in the armor exposed

Why would there be any delay in getting armor to the battlefield? I would hope money is not the issue. If money is the issue, then the American system in total is askew. Troops need the proper equipment to do their jobs.

We should send them whatever they need when they need it. If it is not enough, it is better to develop better equipment as we go — not wait until we have the perfect solution before we do anything. With a son in Iraq, I am outraged that the situation concerning vehicle armor has not been rectified.

Do we, the parents and friends of our servicemembers, need to pay for these items out of our pockets? It is truly a sad day when a Third World terrorist can find such a simple way to bring casualties to American troops, and we cannot eliminate that threat.

Rusty Bishop
Inman, S.C

3 MAY



Bush fought pay restoration

This is in reference to the letter “Stick to the facts” (April 27). The writer advised a previous writer to “stick to the facts.” The same advice can be applied to him. The fact that President Bush signed Public Law 108-136 does not indicate support for restoration of pay to disabled military retirees. Just the opposite.

The Bush administration vehemently fought restoration of pay. Despite overwhelming support and more than 300 co-sponsors, HR 303, which would have authorized restoration for all disabled military retirees, was bottled up in committee, and the Republican leadership refused to let it out. Only three Republican congressmen were willing to sign a resolution that would have brought the bill to the floor for a vote.

The president claimed it was a budget buster, then welcomed an omnibus appropriations bill that contained $27 billion in pork projects. This included $50 million for a tropical rain forest in Iowa and $225,000 to repair a swimming pool in Las Vegas. While the president was concerned about busting the budget, his high-ranking appointees in the Department of Defense were running up millions of dollars in extra costs by flying first class instead of the required coach class. And all the while, DOD officials were calling disabled military retirees “greedy” and “double dippers” for wanting the retirement pay they had earned.

No other federal employees are required to finance their own disability payments. When 401 retired general and flag officers with more than 12,000 combined years of service to their country signed a letter to the president asking him to support HR 303, Bush refused to respond. The president also threatened to veto HR 303 if the House passed it.

When it appeared that there was a great deal of pressure on the House to pass HR 303, the White House proposed what became Public Law 108-136. Unfortunately, the bill leaves out two-thirds of the approximately 630,000 disabled military retirees. For most of the others, it will take 10 years to reach full restoration, by which time many will be dead. (More than 1,000 World War II veterans die every day.)

Our country can help pay for tropical rain forests in the Midwest and local swimming pools, but it can’t afford to restore pay that was earned by those who faithfully and honorably served their country? As the writer said, everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. But next time, stick to the facts.

Gus Subotky
Vine Grove, Ky

5 MAY



Leadership gone bad

I have to say this stuff that happened at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq is an example of leadership gone really bad. I can’t believe for one second that those troops didn’t know what they were doing was wrong. Nor can I believe the command was not aware that it was occurring. It sure doesn’t help our cause here in Iraq or the perspective of our being humane and following the codes of conduct. It really angers me.

Of course this type of behavior has happened in past wars when prisoners were interrogated. But I believed we were above this level of abuse and maltreatment by now. Apparently this is not the case.

I remember when I was attached to a military police company while in the reserves years ago. We were given instructions as to the laws of prisoner treatment and the Geneva Conventions, as we continually do today. The 5 S’s — secure, silence, segregate, safeguard, speed — are taught to all MPs, and the Geneva Conventions laws of prisoner treatment are taught to all soldiers, military interrogators and civilians alike.

It really turns my stomach to think that I’m in the same Army as these people, let alone the same military occupational specialty, and at a level of leadership that allowed it to continue. To use ignorance as an excuse is totally lame. It’s shameful, and they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Sgt. Kevin McCue
Military policeman
Baghdad

7 MAY



One of their own

Are members of the American military going to sit quietly and passively while President Bush, Vice President Cheney and their attack machine attack a fellow veteran of foreign wars? Frankly, I can’t imagine how anyone who has fought or is fighting for our country on foreign soil can sit by while Sen. John Kerry’s patriotism and honor on the battlefield are ridiculed and belittled. Kerry laid to rest any questions about his courage when he signed up for two tours of Vietnam.

Kerry earned his three Purple Hearts by showing uncommon courage under fire and by saving fellow soldiers’ lives. It’s obscene for men who didn’t have the courage to go overseas when their country needed them to now be questioning even one minute of John Kerry’s service on a foreign battlefield.

I hope soldiers and veterans will put aside their partisanship and stand up for Kerry. He’s a proven hero and someone who has already demonstrated that he can remain calm, steady and true in the direst of circumstances. I hope all of our military will stand up and speak loudly in support of one of their own and reject such cowardly behavior by Bush, who has the nerve to call himself “the war president.”

Patrice Parker
Anchorage, Alaska

Not factual

This is regarding the letter “Stick to the facts” (April 27). I agree with the title. But if we want to stick to the facts, we’d realize that the Bush administration’s opposition to Concurrent Receipt (CR) is not fiction, but a cold, hard fact. Although President Bush signed the 2004 Defense Authorization Act, which eliminated the pension reduction for disabled retirees rated at 50 percent or greater, his administration fought long and hard against such a measure. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness David Chu made numerous public arguments against Concurrent Receipt.

When Rep. Michael Bilirakis (R-Fla.) introduced HR 303, calling for an end to the pension offset, most members of the House signed up as co-sponsors. But House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), under direction from the White House, steadfastly refused to allow the bill to come to the House floor for a vote, effectively killing the bill.

After Rep. Jim Marshall (D-Ga.) sponsored a discharge petition to move the bill to the House floor for a vote, the Bush administration still fought the measure. Only after several Republicans such as Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.), and Rep. Thomas Tancredo (R-Colo.) broke ranks with the Republican leadership and signed the petition did the White House relent.

This pressure, along with Sen. Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) S.392 calling for Concurrent Receipt, made the president realize that he was fighting a losing battle. So the president signed the measure into law, but not before the White House tried to strike a last-minute deal which would have made it almost impossible for current and future disabled retirees to qualify for CR. Fortunately, Congress refused to accept that slap in the face to disabled retirees.

Even this is a partial victory. This legislation only covers retirees with disability ratings of 50 percent or higher, and although front-loaded, it will take 10 years to be fully implemented. As for the Veterans Affairs health care system, the Bush administration increased the budget, but not as much as Congress had asked for. This resulted in a funding shortfall. The Bush administration proposed drastic increases in prescription drug costs to disabled retirees, only to back down in a maelstrom of opposition from the disabled veterans community and Congress.

One can argue that the Democrats’ move for CR was undertaken partially to embarrass the Bush administration, although the fight for CR was bipartisan. One can also argue that no move to repeal CR happened under Bill Clinton’s administration. One can also argue that if Sen. John Kerry becomes president, his administration would not be any more supportive of disabled veterans than the Bush administration has been. I’m not defending Sen. Kerry’s stance on disabled veterans, which he hasn’t yet articulated. But saying that President Bush supported Concurrent Receipt or disabled veterans in general is just not factual.

Douglas B. Kelsey
Virginia Beach, Va.

Pacific edition

Thought U.S. above such acts

I have to say this stuff that happened at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq is an example of leadership gone really bad. I can’t believe for one second that those troops didn’t know what they were doing was wrong. Nor can I believe the command was not aware that it was occurring. It sure doesn’t help our cause here in Iraq or the perspective of our being humane and following the codes of conduct. It really angers me.

Of course this type of behavior has happened in past wars when prisoners were interrogated. But I believed we were above this level of abuse and maltreatment by now. Apparently this is not the case.

I remember when I was attached to a military police company while in the reserves years ago. We were given instructions as to the laws of prisoner treatment and the Geneva Conventions, as we continually do today. The 5 S’s — secure, silence, segregate, safeguard, speed — are taught to all MPs, and the Geneva Conventions laws of prisoner treatment are taught to all soldiers, military interrogators and civilians alike.

It really turns my stomach to think that I’m in the same Army as these people, let alone the same military occupational specialty, and at a level of leadership that allowed it to continue. To use ignorance as an excuse is totally lame. It’s shameful, and they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Sgt. Kevin McCue
Military policeman
Baghdad

9 MAY



Iraq resembles Vietnam

I follow the worsening situation in Iraq daily, and it’s beginning to resemble Vietnam. Our military is fighting a guerrilla war that cannot simply be won with force. The so-called sensitive areas the insurgents use to attack our forces are creating restrictions just like in Vietnam, where the U.S. military was prohibited from invading North Vietnam by ground for fear that Russia or China would get involved. The port in Haipong, North Vietnam, couldn’t be mined because Soviet ships that were supplying the North Vietnamese could have been damaged. There were South Vietnamese known as Viet Cong who supported the communist North. They would pretend to be the pro-American South Vietnamese and launch ambushes and conduct terrorist attacks.

In Iraq, U.S. forces, especially those stationed near Najaf, are not permitted to launch a full-out offensive against the insurgents who are holed up in mosques and schools, which they use as fortresses and storage depots to stockpile their weapons and ammunition. To do so would anger Iraqis, just like invading North Vietnam by ground would have prompted the Soviets or Chinese to get involved. We’re seeing that many of our soldiers are restricted from even defending themselves for fear of damaging holy sites that insurgents are using to fire mortars and rocket-propelled grenades because that would promote anger among Iraqis and cause the uprising to be more widespread. Insurgents use ambulances as personnel carriers, but we can’t fire at them because we’d be the bad guys and it would anger Iraqis.

Why haven’t we learned our lesson from Vietnam? I thought that post-Vietnam administrations vowed never to fight a limited war again. But Iraq is definitely such a case because of the many restrictions imposed on our troops. Why are we in Iraq when the majority of the Iraqi people don’t like Americans? Just look at all the kidnappings, uprisings, protests and constant terrorist acts that our troops — the same troops who toppled Saddam Hussein — have to constantly endure. It’s true that many of these terrorist acts are al-Qaida related, but most of them are the work of the very Iraqis we liberated. There’s gratitude for you. The signs are there, and the situation is only going to get worse if the restrictions imposed on our troops remain.

If we’re fighting a war on terror, then why are we breaking the most obvious rule in warfare, the one that says never split your forces in half and fight on two fronts — Afghanistan and Iraq? Don’t get me wrong. Our troops are doing an amazing job within their limitations. But we should never have gone into Iraq in the first place. We should have concentrated our efforts in Afghanistan. At least when Saddam was in power he denied the use of Iraq as an al-Qaida battlefield.

I find it extremely strange that President Bush still has so much support considering that he’s responsible for sending more than 750 soldiers to their deaths for a war without a cause. And that’s not to mention having tainted America’s reputation in the world, as well as standing to lose Afghanistan as a valuable ally in the hunt for al-Qaida.

Gregory A. Palermo
Ramstein Air Base, Germany

Distortion and deception

Recently Stars and Stripes published a “Doonesbury” cartoon depicting a character talking to a Bush administration official. The character referred to going down the rabbit hole a la “Alice in Wonderland.” Current events only serve to reinforce the sense of unreality that appears on a regular basis in the news.

On April 30 Stars and Stripes published pictures of dead Iraqi children on page one and page four. As I understand the policy, news organizations are forbidden by the Department of Defense to show photos of flag-draped coffins of U.S. servicemembers killed in Iraq, partly out of respect for the deceased soldiers and their families. I guess dead Iraqi children aren’t deserving of the same respect because they’re the enemy. Well, children of the enemy anyway. Maybe. Needless to say, the real reason for the photo ban of American coffins is to avoid any reminder that our folks die in wars, too. If people were reminded of this too often, they might not like it.

Further down the rabbit hole, in the same issue of Stripes we encountered the story “Eight 1st AD soldiers killed near Baghdad.” In it, a public affairs officer said it would be a disservice to the eight recently-deceased 1st AD soldiers and their families to infer that the soldiers wouldn’t have been killed had their deployment not been extended. I believe the real disservice to the soldiers and their families is that the soldiers are dead. There is no inference here. The soldiers are dead because their Iraq tour was extended.

The distortion and deception goes on and on. We invaded Iraq because it had weapons of mass destruction. No. We invaded Iraq because it might have had weapons or Saddam Hussein was thinking about having them. Wait. We invaded Iraq because Saddam was hand-in-hand with al-Qaida. No folks. We really invaded Iraq because Iraqis are freedom-loving people, and they had a really bad man running their country. Of course Secretary of State Colin Powell, who was a four-star general during the first Iraq war, claimed we didn’t invade Baghdad at that time because of his fear that if we removed Saddam from power, Iraq would be plunged into chaos. Old, repressed hatreds would re-emerge, and religious and political fighting would result. I guess Sec. Powell was right the first time.

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld swept into the Pentagon in 2001 with grand ideas of downsizing, resizing, rightsizing, or something sizing our military. In the midst of the destruction of the armed forces as we knew them, the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks happened. Suddenly, the military had a lot of work to do. Not to worry, said the Potomac pundits. We have lots of National Guard and Reserve forces to fill the gaps, just like we planned. Besides, President Bush declared that major combat was over a year ago. So all we need to do now is mop up a little light resistance. Curiouser and curiouser, said Alice.

Our soldiers in Iraq — active duty, reserve and National Guard — are performing magnificently. They are simply following orders and doing a fine job in a dangerous and politically uncertain area. Our servicemembers are carrying out their duties with the same courage, bravery and dedication to duty that American soldiers have done for the last 200 or so years. And as usual, they are doing it quietly and professionally.

Somebody once commented toward the end of the Vietnam War: How would you like to be the last man to die for a mistake? I believe the situation in Iraq is rapidly approaching that point.

Ed Lada
Heidelberg, Germany

Scandal embarrassing

This is regarding the story “Geneva Conventions never taught to 6 accused GIs” (May 2). What occurred at the Abu Ghraib prison with Iraqi prisoners has irrevocably embarrassed our Army and our nation, and has severely damaged our strategic level information campaign in the war on terrorism. The blatant abuse of prisoners clearly violated rudimentary common task level training regarding the handling of prisoners. But more importantly, the conduct violated any norm of human decency that could be associated with American values.

The lack of judgment to perform such abuse was compounded even further by the inherent stupidity of creating photographic evidence. There is no excuse regarding a lack of more “in-depth training,” and any suggestion of such reasoning further derides the reputation of the armed forces as an institution. These folks need to do some serious time.

Maj. Scott Morrison
Boblingen, Germany

Abuse of prisoners

It now seems as though it has really happened. This is a genuinely revolting development. I read that reprimands have been given out and investigations continue concerning the abuse of prisoners in Iraq. Reprimands! What a dishonor to our Army and nation.

Reprimands are probably suggested in the Uniform Code of Military Justice for walking on the grass or forgetting to put fuel in one’s Army tank or truck. But not for torture! All soldiers have to deploy with a “Geneva Convention card.” If not, there are falsified records that they did. This card does not come close to allowing torture, humiliation or deprivation. It’s just the opposite.

Capt. James J. Yee, the Army Islamic chaplain at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was put in confinement while being investigated. Yet in the Iraqi abuse case, I read that only “several have received reprimands” and the female general in charge went home. Nowhere have I read or heard anything about the source of the pictures. Did the participants themselves take them and give them out? Are they fakes, as the pictures in the case of British troops are being called? Are any of the American faces in the pictures in confinement now?

Straightforward Army procedure would strongly suggest that everyone even remotely involved, down to those merely having suspicions and taking no action, should have their liberty constrained pending completion of all the investigations, including those from the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency suspected of being involved. And those deemed to have committed criminal acts punishable under the UCMJ should be referred to the most severe “court” appropriate. “Reprimands” are a very unlikely outcome of this proper process.

I have also heard and read that Iraqi leaders have demanded that Iraqi legal officials be included in these investigations. That seems quite proper, too. Who knows, some of the suspects might even be turned over to them for justice!

I’m just sickened by this situation. How do the decent soldiers over there feel about this betrayal of trust that they placed in others? How do they and their families feel when their mission, efforts and sacrifices have been jeopardized by this revolting development? And why have none of the reports so far in Stars and Stripes been by Stripes reporters? Aren’t there any in Iraq?

Robert D. Doleman
Landstuhl, Germany



10 MAY



Double standard

Can Stars and Stripes please explain to its readers why the U.S. government doesn’t want pictures of flag-draped caskets of American servicemembers shown, but the front page of the April 30 Stripes had a photo of a U.S. soldier kneeling over a dead Iraqi child? I feel that this shows to the rest of the world that the U.S. has a double standard when it comes to showing who’s been killed, especially when the U.S. has been on Al-Jazeera’s case for showing the same thing.

Tech. Sgt. Nicholas S. Pancake
Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany

11 MAY



Rumsfeld should resign

One of President Bush’s 2000 campaign slogans was, “I’m a uniter, not a divider.” So far, the only groups that Bush has managed to unite are the Sunnis and the Shiites against our troops. On May 8, Iraqi Muslim sects formed a pan-religious body against the U.S. occupation of Iraq. Not even Saddam Hussein was able to accomplish that feat.

The sickening photos of the “rough treatment” (to borrow Newsweek’s description) of Iraqi prisoners by our soldiers, mercenaries, the CIA and on up the chain of command, are eerily reminiscent of the 1930s photos/souvenir postcards made by “patriotic” lynch mobs, smiling and gesturing in front of hanging African-American bodies. Bush has not only mired our troops in a religious war, but he’s also exported a race war to boot. This administration has dragged our country, and particularly our military, into one hell of a mess.

On Saturday, Bush called Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld “a really good defense secretary,” and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice said Rumsfeld was “doing a good job.” Having seen the photos of sexual humiliations and beatings, and having been forewarned by the Senate and House Armed Services Committees on Friday to brace for images of necrophilia, pedophilia, rape, sodomy and murder yet to come, I wonder by what measure of decency do Bush and Rice base their support of Rumsfeld?

Vice President Dick Cheney also has defended his former boss, saying “get off his case and let him do his job.” Rumsfeld’s job, and how well he’s doing it, was exactly the point of last Friday’s congressional hearings. Under oath, Rumsfeld told committee members that he was first made aware of the prisoner abuses in mid-January of this year. He said the Department of Defense is a huge organization with 18,000 criminal investigations opened and 3,000 courts-martial, and that there was “no way in the world I could anticipate.”

Had Rumsfeld been proactive in supporting the Geneva Conventions and demonstrated concern for the treatment of prisoners — rather than using plausible denial to avoid assuming responsibility — the United States would have been spared its newfound status as “world’s pariah,” our servicemembers wouldn’t be considered “oppressors,” and lives would have been saved.

As a civilian DOD employee, I shudder to think how Rumsfeld’s plan to upend the civilian personnel system by eliminating workers’ rights to bargain and to due process hearings — all in the name of “fighting the war on terror” — will fare under his unwatchful eye.

Rumsfeld has said he accepts full responsibility for the brutal treatment of the prisoners of war held by America, which occurred under his watch. Good. Common decency demands that he resign his position at the earliest opportunity.

Michele Winter
Würzburg, Germany



____________________________________________________________________