Interesting point my boss just made about our military

[VelmaD]

I don't know if anyone has already brought this up or not. We were talking about the Saddam capture here in the office (like everyone else in the country I'd imagine). My boss, who is a veteran, brought up an interesting point I hadn't heard made yet. The capture points to the professionalism of our men and women in uniform. They could have put a bullet in Saddam's brain and saved our government a lot of potential embarassment. They could have put a bullet in his brain out of anger. They could have put a bullet in his brain and claimed self-defense since he had a gun.

Instead they captured him alive. Which is exactly what they were supposed to do under the rules of war. Like she said, they displayed their professionalism.

My boss also noted that a lot of anti-military people needed to hear that - that the military isn't just a bunch of people who signed up to kill people. That most of the people in the military are doing their job and doing it in a competent and professional manner. I thought it worth repeating here - both for the anti-military people on this board and for our DU veteran's and active military because they deserve the praise.

[zbdent]

1. The one gunner was very, very, VERY disappointed

that Saddam surrendered peacefully.

Maybe the Repukes can get him on tape lamenting that it didn't end in a shootout.

NRA spokesman of the year!

[loudnclear]

22. If he had been anybody but Saddam, he would be dead now.

In love and war and businees and crime. The people at the top are always spared.

[stopthegop]

2. very true...

it's easy for some to let their hatred of Bush lead to disparaging remarks about the men on the ground...which is despicable...

[yagotme]

4. I agree

and applaud the thread author for posting this. Too often, fingers are pointed at the top, and blaming those at the bottom, also. The military did their job, and probably could have killed him then, or later, out of view of the cameras, "attempting to escape". They didn't, so I applaud them.

[DoYouEverWonder]

3. They were going to kill him

One of the soldiers was getting ready to throw a grenade into Saddam's hidey hole. Once Saddam popped his head out and surrendered peacefully they were stuck with him because there were too many witnesses, a number of them Iraqis and Kurds who were part of the mission.

[pretzel4gore]

6. hahaha,..

ole cia agent saddam stuck his head out of hidey hole....lol!

[kalian]

5. First of all....we have to believe that they actually captured him 12/14

second of all, I'm sure that they were under VERY strict orders to
capture the guy alive.
Personally, I believe that ole Saddam has been captured a LONG time
ago...when the bombings started. His sons were probably killed
during the bombings and not in the "firefight" that was displayed
for sheeple consumption.

This is all a setup...

[roguevalley]

25. they had a dead or live order on him. I remember rummy saying so.

I am surprised and delighted he was taken alive. Now
he can squeal about US aid to his rise.

[LuminousX]

7. Thank You

I know I sometimes need a reminder that our soldiers in the field aren't mindless GOP drones, that they truly are professional.

[NoKingGeorge]

10. President Clinton's Army is the most professional organization

My Country has ever produced. The High level appointments of his administration have resulted in this professional soldier ethics trickling down to the grunts. Thank You again President Clinton.

[Monte Carlo]

8. I was amazed that Saddam allowed himself to be captured alive.

On a slight tangent...

I was sure there would be a long, drawn out stand-off like Milosevic, or that he would take a cyanide pill or something like that. I thought the egotistical bastard was too proud to allow himself the humiliation. I guess I was wrong. Really wrong.

But kudos for the military men who kept themselves restrained during the moment. I can imagine the temptation to end the life of such a despicable man with nothing more than a finger-twitch would be strong. Good job.

[DemoVet]

9. That's an excellent point,

I served in Vietnam and although I was never directly exposed to the hostility that many of those veterans faced upon their return there is still a stigma attached, from the left that we were bloodthirsty baby-killers and from the right that we were lazy,incompetent losers who refused to fight hard enough to win. What both sides miss is that most of us who saw combat fought honorably and professionally, even if the cause was flawed. What happened in Vietnam, like what's happening in Iraq, was the result of misguided policy and was in no way the responsibility of the people who served there. We accepted, on some level, that whatever our feelings about the war we were sent to fight that it was our duty as citizens to serve.
When the military starts deciding who, where, and when they're going to fight, watch out. That's what got MacArthur fired.

[demsrule4life]

11. Well said

[maggrwaggr]

12. I'm amazed anyone on DU is swallowing the "story" of his capture

these are the people who brought you the Jessica Lynch story, the British Airways story, ad infinitum.

They have presented us with a whole new story about this capture, and everyone is swallowing it, including almost everyone here.

Why?

Believe nothing. He may have been captured months ago, two days ago, we have absolutely no freaking idea what the truth is here.

Remember, they are very good at concocting stories and myths. That's what they do best.

[Skittles]

15. THANK YOU

this "capture" is as orchestrated and phony as the turkey dinner.

[Patriot_Spear]

17. God help me, but I feel exactly the same way...

Why is the Liar in Chief suddenly so believable?

[Snow]

20. I believe the BFEE capable of staging the capture, but if

that's the case, I really don't understand the timing. Doesn't seem to me like there's any good reason for the Saddam capture to have happened now, not just this month this year, but even timed so that word gets back on a Sunday morning. Seems like a bad way to get get bang for your buck if you're staging it.

[Catherine Vincent]

13. That is a good point but we don't know all the details.

How do we know they weren't told to bring him alive? Or Saddam may have been a prisoner for a while and not just found a couple of days ago? We just don't know.

I take offense to your boss calling the anti-war crowd as anti-military. Most of those peace protestors before this bogus war probably had family in the service and supported the troops. They just didn't support this sorry ass administration. That is what you should have told your boss.

[VelmaD]

14. Hang on a second

I never said my boss said anti-war people were anti-military. In fact she and the other veterans in my office seem to think this "war" was a really bad idea. So don't go there. I caught not one bit of flak from her about participating in peace demonstrations. She understands the difference between being anti-war and being anti-people-in-the-military.

Her point was that the soldiers who captured Saddam acted professionally in what could have been a very difficult situation. That's all.

[Skittles]

16. Velma

I'm a veteran too and I don't buy this capture story for one second. Not one second. It's CRAP.

[VelmaD]

19. Ok, I have a serious question

They keep saying there were 600 soldiers involved in this "capture". Could they really have pulled off that big a charade involving that many people? I'm inclined to disbelieve anything that comes out of this administration myself so I'm asking to help clear up this point in my own head. I wasn't in the military so I'm hopeing that DU veterans can help me on this. Does the 600 number they keep bandying about make sense? Could the keep that many soldiers either fooled or quiet?

[Skittles]

24. Bush Inc daily pulls of charades that fool the entire country

yes it could easily be done, but the story about 600 soldiers - come on.

[VelmaD]

27. See, I thought...

the 600 soldier thing sounded funny too. But I was never in the military so what do I know, right? :-)

[DoYouEverWonder]

18. Saddam was caught two days ago

We would have killed him if we could but he surrendered in from of a lot of people and we got stuck with him alive.

W was too ill prepared yesterday and today for this to be going according to the BCF plans. If the BCF had been holding Saddam for awhile, W wouldn't have performed so badly at today's press conference.

I think that a few Iraqis and Kurds, who were more than happy to see Saddam captured, made sure that when he was 'found' the Americans would have too many witnesses around to kill him before the word got out. W wanted Saddam dead, but he certainly didn't want him dead or alive.

[uncle ray]

21. i give them a few days

until they really really wish he were dead. i think saddam knew that any sign of aggression would get him killed, so upon his eventual capture, if this was really it, he was banking on being able to talk once captured, all he needs is one good exclusive interview. but he won't get it.

i think he is going to be a bigger pain in the ass to * now than before.

and there are going to be a lot of tinfoil hats to try on now.

[ThomWV]

23. Let Me Tell You Something

There is one thing I am absolutly certain of. If the young fellow who lifted that lid and saw him there had put one right between Sadam's eyes Bush would be awarding that boy the Congressional Medal of Honor on Christmas Eve and that young lad would never have to work another day in his life.

Talk about hitting the lotto.

No one thought of it at the time. That's the only reason it didn't happen.

Thom

[bleedingheart]

26. it was the Soldiers that found him and not Bush...the Soldiers

should get all the credit since they are bearing the burden of this war.

[booley]

28. it's not the soldiers that are the problem

..it's their commanders. Including the guy suppsoedly that is thier Commander in Chief.

Soldiers are like any other human beings and so no more evil or good then anyone else. But they are also the low men on the military totem pole. They carry out the orders but they don't make them.

it's thier commanders that send them off to illegal wars and thier commanders that don't give a shit if they die and thier commanders that turn a blind eye when oen of the soldiers does do something wrong because it furthers thier goals.

As I have told lots of people, I am very anti-military..becuase I was in the military. I have many friends in the marines and air force and thats why I have such a low regard for those organizations. I've seen how a commander with a God complex can royally f%&k those under his command and get away with it. Too often, the higher up you go, the less those people give a rats behind about thier troops. i've seen exceptions but they are just that..exceptions.

Shrub is supposedly in charge of the military, so it's to him that the responsibility goes. All the american soldiers will have to live with Shrub's mistakes and hubris. But you can bet Shrub won't.
The soldiers deserve priaise not just for completing thier mission but having to be put in such a crappy situation to begin with.

Ok, feel free to yell at me now.

[calimary]

29. No yelling from me. Yours is a most important viewpoint.

Skittles' too.

It's a big burn to me that this "cowboy" is so anxious to press ahead with war-making, when he NEVER went to war himself. Never saw combat. Dodged his duty - if you can call it that - for more than a year. He's no military man. He's about as "schooled in the operational art" as General Norman Schwarzkopf once said Saddam was.
His claims that he defended his country make a mockery of folks like you, who did and saw and smelled and heard, felt up close, and, yes, wore the real thing. YOUR service and sacrifice is noted, respected, and deeply appreciated. His? Well, that's another story.

I seethe about this because of his cavalier "bring 'em on" attitude when he never had to stick his neck out. He's just doing it, by proxy, with somebody else's neck. That infuriates me. And he talks about how glorious it is and how it will go on as long as there's terorism to fight and - uh - how long do you think that will be? You want that steady stream of filled body bags into the foreseeable future? Is that an okay price to pay? Even while every strike from us engenders more hatred and revulsion and revenge-lust - and in expanding numbers of people.

We don't have to worry about Osama recruiting people. We're doing a very effective job of it all by ourselves. Driven by the madness of this self-styled king george, who never bothered to do any of the heavy lifting, himself.

But no yelling from me.

[candy331]

30. The pieces of this whole political

puzzle just keeps falling into place. Sooner/later they will all fall into place on Bush Cabal. Who knows the real story of Sadaams capture that is actually telling it now. Have patience it will come out, as evidenced by the expression on Bush's face during his speech. Might be the CIA marching on with vengeance for outing of Plame and blame game on them as to why Saddam is alive rather than Dead. The capture was masterfully undertaken, but the question is by whom?

"Have Patience"

[alwynsw]

31. Kudos to the troops.

Their restraint in the capture is amazing. It shows the true professionalism of our military. I believe I might have shot him on sight.

I'm one proud vet right now.

[RainDog]

32. Thanks VelmaD

I get sick of the anti-military responses I read...they are just as extremist as the gung-ho we can do no wrong people on the right.

the truth of the matter is that those in the military are humans and citizens of this country, just like the rest of us.

we need a military which can protect America. unfortunately, they have been used by Bush for his own corporate war interests in the most blatant way at this time.

but as every high-ranking military person I've ever come across has said to me (after retirement) -- all recent American wars have been about money.

whatever the reason, and whatever the cost to human lives, both from our own troops and others, and also civilian populations.

nevertheless, this does not dismiss the need for a military for the protection of America.

what it does mean is that the reasons for war must be honestly vetted, and that Congress must again take its responsibility for waging war, instead of allowing presidents, of both parties, to abuse their power and allow legislators to avoid the responsibility to the voters for wars.

maybe if our govt would engage in a little more honesty, we would have a lot fewer troops stationed around the world.

Bush's perpetual war will not save our economy, and will, if history is a teacher, lead to America's downfall. no rabid warmonger will ever want to hear this or admit it could be possible in this country, but that's just one more reason that war as political pandering is really a crime.