Post-WWII vs. post-Iraq war
Afghanistan and Iraq — mistaken for Germany and Japan?
As a survivor of World War II in central Europe and as an old veteran of the wars in Korea and Vietnam, as a kid inmate of Dachau, as well as a houseboy for GIs in occupied Germany, and then as a real GI myself in occupied Japan and Germany, I regret that I must say this: It seems to me that before leading us into the war in Iraq, our illustrious leaders have not done their homework.
And to the best of my recollection and hands-on, been-there observations, I cannot but conclude: As ferociously as Japan and Germany fought in the war, once the war was terminated, then there was peace. Occupation was a snap. In fact, it was a fun time for GIs with Japan’s geisha girls and sake in the ex-empire and with beer and jazz-frenzy Frauleins in the ex-Reich. Not so in Iraq and Afghanistan today.
Once the Japanese and the Germans had put down their arms and done a terminal hands-up, then not one GI was IED’d or shot in the back. I have walked the dark postwar streets of Munich, Germany, and Tokyo without fear, even in my U.S. Air Force uniform, yes, even at night. No suicide bomber anywhere, no IED exploded, no gun was fired at me.
There simply were no “terrorists,” neither in Japan nor in Germany, once Berlin and Tokyo had fallen. But after the fall of Baghdad …?
Have our learned leaders expected jihadists to behave like defeated Germans and Japanese?
Helmut A. Reichel
Aviano Air Base, Italy
Don’t be fooled
Let me first start by saying that anyone who thinks we are in Iraq on a humanitarian mission, or because the U.S. military is in the business of “defending the weak,”
try explaining that to the 400,000-plus dead in the Darfur region of Sudan. There is nothing of value for America in that region of the world, and that is why we are not there. That human life isn’t valuable enough is sickening but, for our government, there is nothing there of natural resources value, like there is in Iraq.
Second, something disturbing to me is the number of soldiers they have believing that “not everyone can be a soldier.” That is far from the truth. The standard for entrance into the military is lower than any other post-secondary activity. It’s necessary to have soldiers, just like any other profession. The truth is, not everyone can graduate from college, not everyone can obtain a master’s degree or a doctorate.
And last, please don’t be fooled into thinking that politicians actually care about soldiers. I had the pleasure of taking care of a congressman, who was ironically going to be coming to the hospital to see wounded troops. He had minor injuries suffered in Iraq, was walking around, taking phone calls, doing interviews with CNN, and ordering hospital staff around to get him high-speed Internet into his patient room.
While in the midst of his “suffering,” he failed to even walk down the hall and visit with his next-door neighbor, about 15 feet, who was actually wounded in Iraq. The only reason politicians are interested in the military is because that’s what the polls say is important, and if they can get face time on CNN or Fox News Channel, they’ll jump at any opportunity.
J. Andrew Peterson
Kaiserslautern, Germany
http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=125&article=33735
Sounds like the writer is talking about Congressman Tim Murphy, R-PA.
Rep. Tim Murphy, R-Pennsylvania, was airlifted to a military hospital in Germany for an MRI on his neck, and Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Missouri, was sent to a Baghdad hospital, said U.S. Rep. Jim Marshall. Marshall, a Georgia Democrat, was in the vehicle but was not hurt.
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/27/congressmen.ap/
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
