Too close for comfort...

Published on April 10, 2004 By dharmagrl In Current Events

I just got news that a base in Baghdad where we have friends stationed at has been bombed. Many troops have been injured, and one Airman is dead. Trying to get more news is incredibly frustrating; no-one's saying anything. I'll just have to wait like everyone esle to find out who it was; if it's one of 'our' guys.

This is a little too close for comfort. We all spout off about how the casualties of war are necessary losses in the pursuit of world peace and freedom...but when it happens to YOU, to people YOU know...it suddenly becomes tangible. Dave's done plenty of stints in the desert but we've only ever come close to this kind of situation before: he had left Khobar Towers a couple of weeks before the bomb went off. We had a friend there then; he was working the LE desk at the time so managed to give us a call and let us know he was ok. This time the phone has been silent...(not that anyone from there called me anyway)..and I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not. If someone from here had been killed or injured, surely the jungle drums would have been beating before now? I hope so.

I was explaining to Shea why we had troops over there. She didn'g get why we were being bombed. I said it was because there were people who lived there who didn't want us there. Her response to that was "So why don't we just leave, then? If the people don't want us and they're killing our guys, do we really need to be there? What are they doing for us that's so important that we have to stay there and let Americans get bombed like that? Don't the President know that that's someone's Dad that got killed? Or doesn't he give a care that some little kid is going to be an orphan this easter?"

I didn't know what to say.

Comments (Page 4)

dharmagrl

on Apr 12, 2004

That's what this is all for, right?

No, Dan, that's NOT what all this is for. This article was my way of expressing my feelings about the war, about my children's concerns and my momentary lack of wisdom and inability to answer their questions. It was NOT intended as a forum for a political debate, nor was it intended to be a place for you to come and flex your mental muscles. I'm tired of your condescending attitude; I would have though that someone as staunchly Christian as yourself would have recognized the need for humility. Unfortunately, you seem to desire us all to worship at the altar of your intellect, and I for one, refuse to do so. I don't worship anyone or anything, least of all you. You're 17 Dan, and that limits you whether you like to accept it or not. I don't care what career-field your parents are in that you think allows you to consider yourself worldy and experienced, YOU are not, and it's that simple.

I won't blacklist you; I refuse to censor anyone. It is your right to express yourself, just as it's my right to express myself. We don't have to agree, and I don't have to like what you have to say, but it's still your RIGHT to say it.

Mr_Frog

on Apr 12, 2004

"No, Dan, that's NOT what all this is for. This article was my way of expressing my feelings about the war, about my children's concerns and my momentary lack of wisdom and inability to answer their questions. It was NOT intended as a forum for a political debate, nor was it intended to be a place for you to come and flex your mental muscles."

Dharmagirl, I think you're being a little self-centered on this respect. If you intended this to not explode into a forum for political debate, you should have made the blog private. Especially due to the fact that the article hit the front page of JU, I would have EXPECTED it to turn into a rather multi-faceted discussion, considering the subject matter.

"I'm tired of your condescending attitude; I would have though that someone as staunchly Christian as yourself would have recognized the need for humility."

What does his being Christian have to do with his opinion on this matter? If you don't like it, you certainly don't have to read it, much less respond to it. I don't agree with some of his views either...but I'm not about to say he's wrong for what he thinks. If it works for him, great...even if I think differently about it.

"You're 17 Dan, and that limits you whether you like to accept it or not. I don't care what career-field your parents are in that you think allows you to consider yourself worldy and experienced, YOU are not, and it's that simple."

Now *that* is a totally unfair remark. How can you know what he's gone through in his 17 years by reading his posts and comments from a blog site? I've known a lot of young people in their late teens and early 20's who are a lot more responsible, wise and intelligent than people twice or even thrice their age. I'm sorry to say that this comment is simply ignorant. From what I've read of your blogs (and most of them are pretty decent), you've had a lot of issues yourself. I'm just curious as to how old you are to be passing such broad-based judgement based on age.

"I won't blacklist you; I refuse to censor anyone. It is your right to express yourself, just as it's my right to express myself. We don't have to agree, and I don't have to like what you have to say, but it's still your RIGHT to say it."

So why even bother to comment about it at all? It seems like you're just fueling a fire for more literal fisticuffs. Again, if what Dan says affects you in such a manner that it pisses you off so you're seeing double, don't give him an opportunity to present his opinions.

For the record, even if I don't agree with what someone says, I respect their opinion, *but* I will be the first person to tell them they are full of shit if I think so. Not to be offensive or anything, but why sugar-coat something for the sake of propriety, as Dan said.

dharmagrl

on Apr 12, 2004

Mr Frog:

I'm 35.

How can you know what he's gone through in his 17 years by reading his posts and comments from a blog site?

On the same token, how can Dan know what I've gone through? That's a two-way street. If you read Dan's responses, you'll see that he also made presumptions about other people who responded. THAT"S what pisses me off.

..and you're right, had I not wanted other people to respond I should have limited the audience.

MadPoet41

on Apr 12, 2004

actually, all you need do is ask and I will stop commenting

Hey Dan? You really shouldn't contradict yourself so conspicuously in the future? I mean, especially since you are so quick to point out when others are not making sense, blah, blah, blah. You have actually managed to impress me here though? I mean, you're speaking in English!

. My, my, my: Did you misplace the little Latin book or something, huh? Please DO continue to visit MY blog, and dazzle me w/ all that pretentious Latin stuff, huh? Especially since I already politely requested you stop it (as did Dharma) and you completely ignored our requests. So take another peek at your own quote above, huh? And follow your own suggestion for once~instead of forever preaching to the rest of us. Your humility truly takes my breath away young man.

~MadPoet

Hey Dharma~Very insightful and thought provoking article. I am always learning new things from you~important things. So I thank you for that again. My own thoughts on this kinda heated topic here? I have never understood war at all. It seems to have too much to do w/the ego, and not enough to do with our hearts and rational minds. I wrote a poem about the Twin Towers, and read it at a poetry reading recently. Here's something from that now: Red is the color of blood/ashes are white/bruises are blue. (That sums up how I feel about what Bush is doing right now. MP)

JillUser

on Apr 12, 2004

Mr Frog, If you had read Dan's writings, you would know a lot about what he had/hadn't experienced. Besides that, no 17yr old American, unless they got into the military with a fake ID, knows diddly about war. Dharma, on the other hand, puts it right up front that she is an Air Force wife. In my book, the experience of an Air Force wife trumps that of a 17yr old's any day when it comes to matters of war.

I know a lot of guys who have joined the military and were chomping at the bit for "some real action." This, again is lack of experience talking. How often do you hear a war vet talking about being excited about fighting? You can have everyone in your family before you go to war and you still won't know what you are in for until you are standing in the desert getting shot at.

I dare say that I would have a sour taste in my mouth about the war if I got news that my cousin/friend/etc just got killed. It doesn't mean I would lose track of the reasoning behind why we are there. I just think that dharma and others have every right to talk/write about how different you feel when it becomes personal. I personally thought that was all she was trying to convey.

dharmagrl

on Apr 12, 2004

Mad and Jill, thank you.

Jill, you got it. Exactly.

Greywar

on Apr 12, 2004

The difference between expressing a feeling and inviting a comment is one frequently lost on us (men) just ask my wife:)

dharmagrl

on Apr 12, 2004

Yes, Grey, I know that all too well. Women are talkers, men are do-ers. Women have the ability to listen and not do; men think that we're asking them to fix the problem.

Thanks for the input!

Mr_Frog

on Apr 12, 2004

You know what, I'm actually going to side with Dan on this one. If you aren't over there first hand, then you don't know about war. You might know about the secondhand effects of war, but nobody can know shit about war unless they've been in one, or are in one.

JillUser : Besides that, no 17yr old American, unless they got into the military with a fake ID, knows diddly about war

Tell that to the hundreds of teenage kids dying on the street today in gang wars. No it's not Fallujah, but it's war all the same...and war is hell whether you're in Compton, Ca or Tukrit, Iraq. Tell that to the hundreds of immigrants who come to America from war torn countries, to grow up here and then (possibly) join our military to protect our country.

Draginol

on Apr 12, 2004

Okay Mr. Frog, you're doing a good job sounding a bit kookish there. JillUser is clearly referring to Dan, a 17 year old high school student living a comfortable middle class lifestyle.

If you really think that a normal person is going to conclude that a 17 year old is on par with knowing about the military experience with the spouse of someone actively serving then go right ahead.

I would, however, be the first to agree that a 17 year old can know a great deal on warfare depending on the cirumstances. But Dan, like most of us here, know about war only from the accounts of strangers from research and the media.

I have no personal experience in war. But I still, like Dan I suspect, understand the reasons why this war is necessary. But I would never try to compare my personal understanding of warfare itself (i.e. the danger, loss, experience) with someone who's been there or has first hand accounts from an intimate.

JillUser

on Apr 12, 2004

Mr Frog, I personally think that comparing thugs in street gangs to our men in the military is a slap in the face. Those street gangs might know about hatred and killing but those aren't the motivations for the US going to war in Iraq.

The kid that you are defending is not in any of the grasping at straws examples you gave. He is a pampered teen sitting safe at home in a middle class house in the mid west. I know this because I have read what he and his parents have written.

citahellion

on Apr 12, 2004

To give you some actual ideas for answers to your daughter's questions....

SOME of the people over there don't want us there. Many of them did and do want us. The ones that don't want us are generally people who were better off under the rule of a man who thought nothing of killing hundreds of his own subjects at a time, of stealing other mens' wives for his own pleasure, of torture and suffering as an evening's diversion. We went over there to get rid of that ruler, and to make sure that the country would not suffer from someone just as bad quickly taking his place. Until we've made sure of that, we HAVE to stay there, to get the job done. Of course the President knows that our soldiers are fathers, brothers, sons, who have family that love them and want them to come home safely. But they joined the army willingly to help keep the world safe, or make it safer, and that's what this war is supposed to be about: making the world a safer place, because a very dangerous and evil man who would to anything to gain and keep power has been removed.

MadPoet41

on Apr 12, 2004

making the world a safer place,

Anytime human beings are being slaughtered~no matter which side you are on~the world IS NOT a safer place. Again, our humble President is allowing his swollen ego to rule his brain, and too many people are dying as a result. Sad. Very, very sad. Dharma~at least you still got me and Jill, huh? Hang in there, kid...

~MadPoet

dharmagrl

on Apr 12, 2004

This has been a very good lesson for both my daughter and I.

Citahellion, thank you for your thoughts. Shea has basically figured things out for herself, and, like I, is still ambivalent about the situation.

Mad, Jill and Brad, thank you for your support.

Mr Frog: how dare you even attempt to compare what my husband and his colleagues do to 'gang warfare'.

Mr_Frog

on Apr 12, 2004

I'll dare whatever I damn well please. I believe that everyone ought to take a couple of steps back from their emotional perspectives on this matter and look at things with a little more objectivity. Now that it seems that I have to fight this particular battle on three different fronts, I'm going to take it one person at a time.

DharmaGirl: When your husband gets back (and I honestly hope he does get back in one piece) why don't you ask him about some of the things that he saw our soldiers do while he was in Iraq? Why don’t you ask him about some of the missions that he may have been involved in while he was over there? Odds are that he won't or more likely can't tell you about some of the things. Do you honestly think that there were no cases where innocents were harmed or killed due to the actions of our men over there? Do you not think that some of our guys over there have acted brutishly and have done things to some of the people over there that would be frowned upon if they were back over here in the states? You CAN'T know these things because you're not there to see them. What the media is feeding you about this war is sensational nationalism at its best.

I was discussing this particular discussion with my mother-in-law today. My father-in-law served in two tours of duty in Vietnam. She said that even with his first-hand account of what the war was like, she could still not get a clear picture of what war is actually like. She also said that he told her some stories about what some of the men did over there that wouldn't exactly get them lined up at the gates of heaven. Maybe I just don't have enough faith in my fellow man to do the right thing, but I don't think that war, as a basic event, has changed much since my father-in-law fought in Vietnam.

I knew I was going to take some hits for the gang warfare comment and I still stand behind it. Gang warfare is only different for the sole reason of the purpose of the war. If you look at it from an objective point of view, these people are soldiers in their own right, fighting for a cause that they believe in. They are disciplined in the fact that they fight for what they think is right, regardless of what you or I think. I am not condoning what they do in any sense of the word, but all they are soldiers fighting a street war. Your husband takes orders from his higher-ups. And if he is a good soldier, he carries those orders out to the best of his ability. He believes in what he is fighting for, otherwise he probably wouldn't have joined the military. THIS is the distinction I was trying to convey with this.

Brad: No, I can't assume that she was just referring to Dan...because she said that "NO 17 year old". Again, broad and baseless generalization based on age.

"I have no personal experience in war. But I still, like Dan I suspect, understand the reasons why this war is necessary. But I would never try to compare my personal understanding of warfare itself (i.e. the danger, loss, experience) with someone who's been there or has first hand accounts from an intimate."

And this is EXACTLY the point I'm trying to get across. Except that some people seem to lend more credibility to a military spouse about what war is exactly about. I'm sorry, but even if dharmagirl's husband tells her everything about what happened in Iraq, she still can't have a clue about war. She can gather her own interpretations of what war is about, from the telling of her husband, but her opinion lends no more credibility to me than Dan's. Now, if I were to consider her husband's take on things, that's a completely different story. I just can't swallow the "my word is better or more true because I'm an airman's wife" attitude that she is giving. Personally, I think the whole war is a crock of shit, and that we should have not gone in the first place, but that is an argument for another blog.

JillUser: You say that street gangs may know about hatred or killing but those aren't the motivations of the US going to war... maybe not, but do you think that our guys over there don't feel some sort of hatred towards these people? Maybe hate them because they feel that they're responsible for 9/11 or the USS Cole or something else (whether it is a correct assumption or not). What about the people who are being held under military surveillance in Guantanamo Bay? I've heard stories (fed by the media, so I take it with a huge grain of salt) that our military men have been beating and starving some of these people. What about the guy who lobbed a grenade into one of our soldier's tents in Iraq a few months ago? Again, there is a lot of emotion behind these comments, and I don't think anyone here is really trying to view this whole discussion from an objective standpoint.

The only reason why I'm defending Dan is because everyone here is reducing his opinions of this whole discussion because he's 17 and opinionated. I'm not saying that his knowledge of warfare is superior to anyone else's. I'm not saying that what he is saying is necessarily right either. But he has brought up what I think are some very valid and thoughtful points in this discussion and people are basically writing him off because he's a 17-year-old suburban white-boy. This was actually an interesting discussion, and then all of a sudden it started to become a personal attack against Dan.

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!