Generals, VoteVets blast Bush war policy

May 9, 2007

When it comes to credibility on war policy and strategy, it’s tough to beat this kind of lineup.

In an act of defiance perhaps not seen since President Truman fired Gen. Douglas MacArthur, today the anti-war veterans group VoteVets.org, which has been influential with Capitol Hill Democrats, is launching a half-million-dollar TV ad campaign featuring Maj Gen John Batiste (Ret.), former commanding general of the first infantry division in Iraq.

The ad begins with a clip President George W. Bush saying “I have always said that I will listen to the requests of our commanders on the ground.”

Batiste then appears, saying, “Mr. President, you did not listen. You continue to pursue a failed strategy that is breaking our great Army and Marine Corps. I left the Army in protest in order to speak out. Mr. President, you have placed our nation in peril. Our only hope is that Congress will act now to protect our fighting men and women.”

There’s a national version, but VoteVets is targeting Republican Sens. John Sununu (N.H.), John Warner (Va.), Susan Collins (Maine), and Norm Coleman (Minn.), all of whom just so happen to be up for re-election next year, and nearly all of whom are considered vulnerable incumbents. (VoteVets is also running the ad in districts of nine key House GOP incumbents.)

The ads include a lawmaker-specific message. For example, the ad in Maine will conclude, “Sen. Collins, protect America, not George Bush.”

Moreover, Batiste, commander of the First Infantry Division in Iraq from 2002 to 2005, is in the first VoteVets ad, but there are two more on the way. The next ad will feature retired Army Major General Paul D. Eaton, who was in charge of training the Iraqi military from 2003 to 2004, and the third will feature retired Gen. Wesley Clark, whom some of you may recall from the 2004 presidential election.

I can appreciate the fact that there’s some legitimate debate about whether retired generals should participate in a national political debate like this, but given the circumstances, I discount concerns about the politicization of these guys. The Bush White House routinely insists that it “listens to the commanders,” so to disagree with the president is necessarily to disagree with the military.

These ads help show otherwise. And if, by chance, the ad campaign helps change a few votes on the Hill, the VoteVets commercials may end up saving lives.

Something tells me Major Gen John Batiste (Ret.) and Major Gen Paul D Eaton (Ret) are about to get subject to the worst smear campaign since, well, since Gen Wesley “He actually was friendly to that traitor Michael Moore!!” Clark. Or since Cindy “Deranged moonbat radical whore” Sheehan. It’s going to get very, very ugly.Hang in there, guys.

  • one more crack appearing in the wall. excellent. soon the wall will tumble down. and not a moment too soon.

  • I agree with LtC Paul Yingling when he says that these guys should have spoken out when they could have had a real effect.

    http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2007/05/2635198

    That said, better late than never. Plus in the manner they’re doing it (as opposed to doing an ad paid for by the Democrats) it will be harder to smear them. Not that the right won’t try.

  • given the circumstances, I discount concerns about the politicization of these guys.

    I’d say better to be politicized than pawned but I don’t pretend to understand why this is a legitimate concern, ever. I know active members of the military have constraints on what they can say but once they’re out, what justification can there be for expecting them to remain silent on any issue?

    Go VoteVets!

  • I found an interesting interview with Batiste that occurred back in Sept. 2006. While he was speaking out against Rumsfeld at the time, it looks like he is in no way looking for a pullout from Iraq. Unless his position has changed since that time, he might be looking for further escalation…

    Do we need to revisit a draft or some type of national service?

    I think we need to seriously mobilize this country for war. That may include rationing systems to help pay for the war. It may include some kind of national service.

    This is going to go on for a long time: 10 years, maybe longer. I don’t know. But everything is being treated as if it is business as usual, yet we’re spending $1.5 billion a week. We’re funding the Army with budget supplements. That means there are no offsets. In reality, we’re mortgaging our future.

    No one is seeing this except military families.

  • It’s a great ad, and I applaud Batiste for having the integrity to turn down a promotion and resign rather than continue to be a party to the madness; I’m sorry there have not been more like him.

    The sad truth is that as long as Bush can find a “commander” who will toe the line – even if he has to give his dog, Barney, a commission – Bush will always have someone who will do his bidding.

    Strengthening and increasing the Democratic majority is a worthy goal – maybe our best hope for the future.

  • My God, my God. Is it possible that people of power and influence are FINALLY organizing and speaking out with courage and conviction to save our precious democracy?! Halleluiah!!! Where do I contribute? Oh yea, right here –> http://www.votevets.org/

    Note: I just tried and there website is not coming up. Hmmm..?

  • Former commander backs return of military draft

    By Mark St.Clair, Stars and Stripes
    Mideast edition, Saturday, April 14, 2007

    A former commander of the 1st Infantry Division in Iraq said this week it might be time for the United States to discuss bringing back the military draft.

    On Monday, retired Maj. Gen. John Batiste told News 10NBC in Rochester, N.Y., that in order to “win the peace” in Iraq, current troop levels there would need to be nearly doubled to 300,000, adding that to make numbers like that possible, a military draft might need to be considered. The draft was last used in the U.S. in 1973.

    “We’ve had generations of Americans now who have not served their country, they don’t know what the word means,” Batiste told News 10NBC. “And I’m here to tell you that’s probably not a healthy situation.”

    http://stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=52668&archive=true
    _____________________________________________________________

    You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

  • I love that line “protect America, not George Bush” because it separates the two. For far too long, GWB has wrapped himself in the flag (a flag he never fought for, of course) and his enablers have insisted that Bush IS America, and that disagreeing with him is, ipso facto, unAmerican or Anti-American, even if the dissenters are actual combat heroes. I’m sick of hearing it, sick of being told that dissent is treason, and deeply, deeply sick of George Bush.

  • VoteVets has done an exemplary job. They are standing up for sound military policy and against the Yosemite Sam-style blunderings of the Bush administration. They deserve as much support as they can muster. I intend on making a donation right away.

  • Being against this invasion of Iraq (and the idea of war in general) as I was and am…. I don’t see a problem with instituting a “national service” type draft. I also would have rather seen Bush listen to Zinni and others who told him he needed “hundreds of thousands” of troops. There would have been less chaos, death and destruction if he had at least done that.

    So to me, any military officer that will stand up and be counted (even at this point) is someone who should be appreciated and praised. (And I was for Wesley Clark in 2004.)

  • So to me, any military officer that will stand up and be counted (even at this point) is someone who should be appreciated and praised. (And I was for Wesley Clark in 2004.)

    Agreed, on both counts.

  • As a retired officer myself, I don’t see how you can say there’s “legitimate debate” about whether these generals have a right to speak out. Of course they do. All of us on the retired rolls have that right. We’re not on active duty any more.

    Didn’t Eisenhower speak out against Truman? Fact is, there have been 12 generals who were elected president, and quite a few more who ran and were not elected. All of them chose to “participate in a national political debate” and thank God for it. If anything, those with greater first-hand knowledge of the issues and the facts on the ground have a DUTY to speak out.

  • I would assume that for General Batiste to turn down a promotion and instead retire, so he can speak out, deserves more credit than what it seems on the surface. When turning down a promotion, that means turning down more money for retirement, and that means less money, EVERY month, for the rest of your life. Sure he isn’t hurting, but it also shows that he is not selfish in that manner. It takes a strong person to take that stand, especially as some readers mentioned… when is the swiftboating going to commence?

    In a few years, when Bush is no longer president, and our troops are home, most people will have forgotten about Batiste, but he’ll still be receiving less money in pension benefits.

    I hope there are plenty more officers who are having the courage to stand up.

    I also agree with the fact that most Americans have no clue what it means to ‘serve’ your country. A mandatory period of time serving your country wouldn’t be such a bad idea. Even if it is only a year, and you can choose to be in a non-combat role….

  • I really don’t understand why there is any debate, legitimate or not, about retired military officers speaking out or becoming involved in the “political debate” about the war. No one criticizes a retired military officer for speaking FOR the war, and they do it all the time, and they get paid by the corporate media, as advisors of course, to do it.

    How long will it take Colin Powell to make restitution for his disgraceful performance at the UN in the runup to the war, and his silence ever since. If there was one person who could have put a serious crimp in our national nightmare/disaster before it happened it was Powell, but he’s still being the loyal lapdog, and so he won’t administer the coup-de-gras to a failed administration. One has to wonder why he is more loyal to a failed, and horribly, shortsighted “Commander-Guy” than to the country he served for so long.

  • Generals Benedict Arnold was against the Revolutionary war, Union General McClellan wanted to have peace and the south to keep slaves.
    I guess every war has its military detectors.
    If we pull out will we be setting up another terrorist haven? It occurred after the Russians left Afghanistan and we didn’t fill the vacuum.

  • Gereral Batiste’s voluntary retirement in order to speak out puts him in a position of honor worthy of further national leadership consideration. I want to know more about how he would rally America and it’s allies if given the opportunity.
    We the people should speak in favor of someone who can lead this country back to a position of honor and one that compassionatly welcomes “the tired, the poor, and the huddled masses yearning to be free.” Further, let us not build those southern walls, but let us welcome an honorable people along with other nations to unite with us to help put down those destructive idiologies out there.

    • Comments are closed.