Explanation for Memo to Troops

Published on October 21, 2004 By stevendedalus In Politics

Let me explain my rather harsh peek into the psychology of the troops in Iraq. It was motivated by the arrogance of Republicans on this blog site taking for granted that it is the duty of troops to support and vote for their incumbent commander in chief. Obviously these bloggers are suffering from amnesia when it was perfectly okay for the military to hate Clinton, and the military absentee votes showed this both times he ran. Even Powell during the first term was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and did not hide his contempt for Clinton. Often these fair-minded bloggers comment that the troops are overwhelmingly for Bush without acknowledging that the millitary is also overwhelmingly Republican, and as a result loyalty to the commander in chief is irrelevant. In ‘96 the military had no difficulty preferring Dole, not only that he was a Republican but, ironically a veteran of combat, which now, because of the vicious attacks on Kerry’s war record, the military does not consider him a proud veteran.

What our friendly opponents on this blog site don’t seem to realize is that as citizens, members of the military are entitled to hear the other side and vote as they sees fit and in a democracy has nothing whatever to do with disloyalty should they choose another.

For a blogger to interpret my blog as sedition is shameful. Even a loyal, honorable soldier has the right to fire or retain his commander in chief when up for election.

http://stevendedalus.joeuser.com

Comments (Page 1)

pseudosoldier

on Oct 22, 2004

For a blogger to interpret my blog as sedition is shameful. Even a loyal, honorable soldier has the right to fire or retain his commander in chief when up for election.

Shameful? I don't completely agree. Overstated? Yes, sure. I think that the questions that you had posted (are memos usually a laundry list of questions? I didn't think so, but maybe I didn't get that memo) were very slanted, and seemed to be encouraging soldiers to take a dim view of their current command. Yes, their command. That's what the president is.
Now, I'm in total agreement with you that it is every soldier's right to "fire or retain" his CinC, and I think you put that well. I would also direct you to Link, which gives a pretty good overview of what the military bloggers here feel and believe on the issue of "the duty of troops to support and vote for their incumbent commander in chief." (Please also keep in mind that it *is* our duty to support him; we are not required, however, to say nice things, vote for him, or even compliment him on his tie.)

edit: Please do know that I'm fairly happy that you're willing to expound upon your original ideas, both in this new thread and in the other thread, to make it clear what your intent was. I especially like your italicized line about how, when we receive orders, we should follow them loyally. Thanks for trying to be level-headed about this.

stevendedalus

on Oct 22, 2004

Shameful? I don't completely agree. Overstated?

Fair enough.

Please do know that I'm fairly happy that you're willing to expound upon your original ideas, both in this new thread and in the other thread, to make it clear what your intent was. I especially like your italicized line about how, when we receive orders, we should follow them loyally. Thanks for trying to be level-headed about this.

Thank you very much, greatly appreciated. The link was illuminating on which I commented.

citahellion

on Oct 22, 2004

arrogance of Republicans on this blog site taking for granted that it is the duty of troops to support and vote for their incumbent commander in chief.

I don't know what you've been reading, but I haven't seen anything like that.

stevendedalus

on Oct 22, 2004

Perhaps overstated; more like constantly referencing troops as overwhelmingly Bush voters, presuming disgust for Kerry.

Texas Wahine

on Oct 22, 2004

more like constantly referencing troops as overwhelmingly Bush voters, presuming disgust for Kerry.

I see that as well. There is a presumption by some, though certainly not all, that liberals don't serve in the armed forces and that it is not possible to be a liberal, or even question the decisions and policies of the government, and be a passionately patriotic person.

scatter629

on Oct 22, 2004

Was this about the CNN report stating that 63% of the troops support Bush and in the same survey, about the same percentage 63% agree that he made a mistake in invading Iraq? Somewhere along the way,nothing else was heard about the second part of the survey. If I were in the military and I was handed out a survey to fill about my political choice before elections, I'd probably play safe and put down the name of the incumbent commander-in-chief as well. There was a book entitled "How to Lie with Statistics" several years ago. It's probably acceptable to expect more of this "surveys" being used by both camps as we draw near our Nov. verdict, but certainly not Third-World style electoral fraud at vote-counting.

stevendedalus

on Oct 22, 2004

Good statement. In my prime, it was hard to find a conservative in the armed forces; FDR had solid backing, even though most were teenagers[had to be 21 to vote] besides, with snail mail it was pointless overseas to cast a ballot anyway.

stevendedalus

on Oct 22, 2004

I'd probably play safe and put down the name of the incumbent commander-in-chief as well.

I fear you're right.

Texas Wahine

on Oct 22, 2004

Many people are touting the Army Times survey, and it may very well accurately reflect the thoughts of the troops, there are a couple of problems I see with it.

1. It is a poll of Army Times subscribers. Not all soldiers subscribe, and at around $50/yr, I think that subscribers would tend to consist of more career military and fewer lower enlisted.
2. To my knowledge, the poll was conducted via email (that's how we received it, anyway), and many (if not most) deployed troops do not have ready internet access.

These are not facts, they are just my thoughts.

Madine

on Oct 22, 2004

FDR wasn't a war protestor though; he was rather hawkish imo.

I think Kerry's antiwar activities explain the military's loathing of him.

Myrrander

on Oct 22, 2004

Geez, I know Kerry spoke out against Vietnam, but he was speaking out against Nixon, not the soldiers. I've read his testimony multiple times, and he's very respectful of the men he served with. I've talked with friends that have come back from Iraq, and they've said they don't support the war, but they don't speak ill of the soldiers they served with. Am I wrong to think that it's OK to speak against the decisions of an Administration while still being proud that there are people willing to put their lives on the line in the armed forces?

MNFisherman

on Oct 22, 2004

I know Kerry spoke out against Vietnam, but he was speaking out against Nixon, not the soldiers

Unfortunatly for Kerry, it doesn't come across to most people that way(I'm not saying if he did or not). Be it the way the media uses it or the way the opposition to him uses it, it just "seems" like he was against the members he served with.

If I were in the military and I was handed out a survey to fill about my political choice before elections, I'd probably play safe and put down the name of the incumbent commander-in-chief as well

Listen I'm no expert but I was in the marine corps from 95'-99'. I know that was a while ago, but it is perfectly acceptable to publicly disagree with the president. You have to give your staff sergeant respect for the stripes on the collar, but not because of the man that he is. Trust me there are plenty of disgruntled slodiers that propbably won't vote for bush, but that's not cause of the war, there have always been disgruntled sodiers who didn't understand what military life would be like and want to get the hell out. unfortunatly military life in war or peace time sucks. It's a hard life, many times away from your family for a year during peacetime, or standing 24 hour dutys, or even mess duty. I only stayed in 4 years, not cause I didn't believe in what I was doing, but because the lifestyle wasn't very compatable with the plans I had in my life. I was fortunate not to have served in combat like the men and women serving now have to, but the military mindset never changes. I have many friends on active duty around the world, many in iraq and afganistan, and soldiers attitudes hav'nt changed at all.

Myrrander

on Oct 22, 2004

Anybody who just listens to the media or the DNC or RNC and doesn't read things for themselves is a sheep.

drmiler

on Oct 22, 2004

Reply #11 By: Myrrander - 10/22/2004 9:19:39 AM
Geez, I know Kerry spoke out against Vietnam, but he was speaking out against Nixon, not the soldiers. I've read his testimony multiple times, and he's very respectful of the men he served with. I've talked with friends that have come back from Iraq, and they've said they don't support the war, but they don't speak ill of the soldiers they served with. Am I wrong to think that it's OK to speak against the decisions of an Administration while still being proud that there are people willing to put their lives on the line in the armed forces?

Sorry Myrrander:

they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.

But this does *not* sound like being respectful to me.

BTW you do realize the his *entire* chain of command and the gunner from his boat are speaking out against him?

stevendedalus

on Oct 22, 2004

It is a poll of Army Times subscribers. Not all soldiers subscribe, and at around $50/yr, I think that subscribers would tend to consist of more career military and fewer lower enlisted.

I agree, and also think career guys carry a lot of weight in directing opinion and attitudes.

You have to give your staff sergeant respect for the stripes on the collar, but not because of the man that he is. Trust me there are plenty of disgruntled slodiers that propbably won't vote for bush, but that's not cause of the war, there have always been disgruntled sodiers who didn't understand what military life would be like and want to get the hell out. unfortunatly military life in war or peace time sucks

A fair evaluation.

his *entire* chain of command and the gunner from his boat are speaking out against him?

Aye, but it doesn't mean they are speaking the truth.

think Kerry's antiwar activities explain the military's loathing of him.

I agree--Vietnam is hard to tuck away in oblivion.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!