‘Grumbling in the Ranks’

January 16, 2007

We can add several hundred U.S. troops to the growing list of opponents of the president’s policy in Iraq.

Vocal opposition to President’s Bush’s strategy of sending more than 20,000 additional troops to help secure Iraq has grown to include some of the troops themselves.

A group of more than 50 active-duty military officers will deliver a petition to Congress on Tuesday signed by about 1,000 troops calling for an end to the U.S. occupation of Iraq. “Any troop increase over here will just produce more sitting ducks, more targets,” said Sergeant Ronn Cantu, who is serving in Iraq.

Under the 1988 Military Whistleblower Protection Act, active duty military, National Guard, and Reservists may communicate with any member of Congress without fear of reprisal, even if copies of the communication are sent to others.

Now, I appreciate the fact that a petition signed by 1,000 active-duty troops against the war could probably be countered by an equally big petition on the other side. But let’s not forget that the latest Military Times poll, which questioned 6,000 randomly selected active-duty members and found barely one in three service members approve of the way the president is handling the war, and only 38% of those surveyed said they wanted to see more troops sent to Iraq. In other words, men and women in uniform are pretty much where civilians are in terms of opinions on the war.

I’m curious, though, how the right deals with news like this. Are U.S. troops “soft,” in conservatives’ opinion? Do our soldiers advocate “defeat and retreat” and “cut and run” policies? Do they lack commitment to “victory”? Do they prefer that we fight terrorists “here,” instead of “there”?

Free prize for the first to find a conservative sincerely asking why the troops hate America.

From the comments section of the WSJ blog post you link to:
Why do those troops not support the troops? And speaking of that, why does over half of America hate America? Comment by Jimbo – January 15, 2007 at 9:40 pm

If “Jimbo” is a conservative, then I win! Where can I pick up my prize?

  • I have a few questions on the subject of war and popular support/authorization.

    It’s said only Congress can declare war or authorize military action. If that’s the case, why is Rep. Murtha pushing for a resolution saying the U.S cannot invade Iran without congressional approval? Isn’t that like a resolution saying you have to follow law?

    Also, why the outrage over potential unilateral action within Iran borders, but NO outrage over supporting Ethiopian action in Somalia and unilateral bombings leading to civilian deaths in Somalia? So we can bomb Somalia whenever we want, but not in Iran? What’s different other than Iran can fight back but Somalia can’t?

  • Ya think this’ll be the lead (lede) story on any major TeeVee news program? Har-dee-har-har!

    Since I never watch TeeVee “news” anymore, I can only imagine them interviewing some old state-side fart at American Legion post drink-fest saying something to the effect of “This is the way it’s always been. Soldiers always gripe.” Perhaps a pompous pundit might intone “Theirs not to make reply, / Theirs not to reason why, / Theirs but to do and die”. Pathetic.

  • Is this related to the AppealforRedress.org that was mentioned in the style section article in the WaPo?

  • Soldiers have a well known liberal bias.

    I’m curious, though, how the right deals with news like this.

    By talking specifics rather than sweeping generalities. Soldiers that signed the petition can be painted softy surrenderphiles to distinguish them from the “real” soldiers who are of course gung ho to go hard and long and deep or whatever sexually charged language the Wanker-in-Chief is using to describe his “new way downward” in Iraq.

  • The Right will ignore it. They have a lot more “important” issues to discuss. Looking at memeorandum.com, the Righty blogs are all over Rep. Dennis Kucinich proposal to bring back the Fairness Doctrine. Other hot stories for the Righties – ailing Castro, former U.N. Oil-for-Food Chief Benon Sevan indicted over bribes from Saddam’s regime and a new ordinance in Greenleaf, Idaho, which calls for its citizens to own guns and keep them ready in their homes in case of emergency. I wrote a post on MyDD.com about how conservatives have been reduced to talking about trivial things. Today is no different.

  • I’m not too sure I like the idea of an activist army with petitions and stuff. Scares me a little to see organized politcal action within the military. It sounds good now because they’re espousing our ideas, but like CB said, most of the soldiers don’t agree with us. I wouldn’t want the politicization of the military to further erode the separation of powers in the government so that suddenly the army decides which president it will obey and which one it won’t. These issues need to be worked out in another venue.

    I remember the tremor that went through the public psyche when Reagon was shot and some general (was it Westmoreland?) came on TV and “reassured” the nation that he was in charge. Geez, with all the corruption and executive power-mongering, all we need is a coup to descend into true Banana Repuplicanism.

  • The right wingers will use the meme that the “liberal media” and Congress have demoralized the troops causing them to not want to be there anymore. They’ll blame the left for instilling “defeatism” into the armed forces.

    But who better than the armed forces to judge what’s curently happening in the quagmire over there. The troops have to bear the hateful glares from Iraqis after years of busting down doors and forcibly searching homes while pointing guns at women and children. The guys on the fronts lines see the stupidity of doing the same failed tactics over and over with the expectation of different results each time.

  • Clearly those troops must be Democrats.

    When it comes to polls (including the Military Times one) that reflect badly on the Dear Leader, the new conserva-doofus talking point that I keep coming across essentially goes like this:

    “I’ve never been part of any poll therefore the polls are made up by the liberal media.”

  • Actually Dale, it was former General Alexander Haig who was Sec State at the time. No one appreciated his comments anyway and he found himself to be quickly replaced.

    It should not be surprising as Haig was a MacArthur protege in Japan and Korea who picked up the worst traits of the American Caesar (pompous, arrogant, and bullheaded.)

    It becomes troubling that the military would become politically active (especially the generals) but I think this has a lot to do with the military survival instinct as the survival of the institution is more important than life itself (Death Before Dishonor, etc.) Hopefully, this will make people realize the danger of having those evangelizing fundie generals in the USAF.

  • Thanks Former Dan #11. The Republicans are releasing a whole army of Genies that can’t be put back into bottles.

  • petorado is right.

    It is obviously the Media’s fault along with the Dems. If there had been more stories about schools opening reported in the Media instead of things blowing up, all would be fine with the troops and the non-reality based world.

  • As a former member of the Army, it really hurts to see this come to pass. I suppose it was inevitable, but edging more and more to open revolt will undermine the capabilities of the Army far after BushCo. is gone. The seeds which are being planted today- a junior officer corp being willing to stand up to the leadership- will clearly echo even decades from now, as those same junior leaders become the Generals twenty years from now.

    There is no winning here, no room for gloating. We are truly destroying our Army, and the rebuilding of it will be another long process.

    Truly, Bush and his deputies have committed the worst crimes against our own country. Impeachment is too good for him.

  • The war reminds me of Rollerball – where no one can leave the field unless maimed or dead. I suspect there are a fair number of soldiers who see the similarities as well.

  • #8 I’m not too sure I like the idea of an activist army with petitions and stuff. Scares me a little to see organized political action within the military.

    Perhaps they learnt from the Christian Embassy campaign.

  • …the Righty blogs are all over Rep. Dennis Kucinich proposal to bring back the Fairness Doctrine…

    They should be worried about it. The GOPs ability to control the message/media for the last 6 (or 12, depending on you how you look at it) years is largely due to the effects of abolishing the Fairness Doctrine. Bringing it back is a great idea.

  • ***The seeds which are being planted today- a junior officer corp being willing to stand up to the leadership- will clearly echo even decades from now, as those same junior leaders become the Generals twenty years from now.***
    ——————————Castor Troy.

    It should be the responsibility of every soldier, whether junior officer, general staff, or enlisted man, to stand up and protest something so inherently flawed as this administration’s current policies as regards Iraq. It should also be their duty to stand up for the Constitution, rather than submit blindly to the will of a tyrant—even if that tyrant should be their “Commander-in-Chief.” Thus, volumes are spoken as to the value of an educated military.

    The soldiers in question are not demonstrating conflict with a plan of action that will work. They are protesting the furthered continuation of a failed strategy that is pursued solely for political and economic gain—and not for any coherent military objective….

  • I’ve been concerned for quite some time that the military has been so solidly behind the Republicans. Maybe this is the end of that cordial relationship. I would be more concerned if the soldiers were pushing a political agenda here, but I don’t have as many worries about them wanting to stay alive. Sometimes the meat doesn’t want to go into the grinder. The sooner those in the military learn that the Democrats can be their friends, and that the Republicans aren’t always trustworthy, the sooner we can have a military that’s not slanted toward either party. Respect for civilian authority cannot survive if soldiers think only a President from one party is worthy of respect.

  • I’ve seen the concerns expressed by Castor Troy and others that something is amiss when active soldiers become politically active. I guess I wonder if America has ever had a more unbalanced and reckless war-time President. Sure, soldiers are supposed to follow orders, but they also don’t have immunity from the consequences of “just following orders.” Yes, the President is Commander-in-Chief but through out history there have been a number of rulers who were nominal leaders of their nations’ militaries. That didn’t mean they weren’t total arseholes. Not to mention no one likes being blown up because some little dipshit wants to play cowboy.

    Or put another way, at what point can a soldier start being more than a man in uniform?

    • Comments are closed.