Please tell me how you do it.
321 of our brave troops have been sacrificed to the war on terror, to date, this year.
Please tell me how do you harden yourself to that fact?
2,760 of our brave troops have been sacrificed to the war on terror, to date, since Operation Iraqi Freedom/Enduring Freedom began on March 19th 2003.
Please tell me as you look into my eyes how this can be okay to you?
3,064 U.S. and 'coalition of the willing' forces have been sacrificed to the war on terror combined.
Please tell me how you can watch these brave men and women/boys and girls go off to this war knowing many will not come home and right yourself with that knowledge?
18,587 of our brave troops have been wounded in this war on terror. Their blood, flesh, limbs, vision, mental capacity and futures laid to waste.
Please tell me what kind of armor you put on your soul to find the loss of these braves ones futures acceptable.
42,346 innocent Iraqi civilians have been sacrificed to the War on terror and in their name for freedom.
Please tell me if you ever stop and realize that they are no different than us -- Mothers, Fathers, Sisters, Brothers living their lives as we do. Tell me if the tables were turned how would you feel seeing your loved ones slaughtered and not quite knowing for what? Please tell me how to also put those blinders on my eyes.
Thousands of Peace activists work daily to right these wrongs. Many of us are having our civil rights sacrificed in this war on terror. Millions of us should be in the streets to end this abomination.
Please tell me what keeps you home and apathetic? We are tired and need some help.
One tombstone is being placed on a grave today. The tombstone belonging to my precious and desperately missed nephew Casey who was sacrificed to the war on terror.
Please tell me where to get the patriotic shell that I can put on to accept this daily horror...
Dede
Proud, Sad Auntie of
Casey Sheehan
**********************************
SUPPORTING THE TROOPS
Congress’ Memorial Day Message to the Troops: Make Do While We Go On Vacation
On Feb. 16, 2006, President Bush requested $72.4 billion in supplemental funds for continuing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Just over three months later, the current Do-Nothing Congress has yet to pass the bill, and is instead busy fighting over how much pork to keep.
Earlier this week, the conference committee that is negotiating a final bill announced that it would not complete the bill before Memorial Day. Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA), the chief House negotiator, said, “We have communicated with the individual military services and while it is not preferable, they have informed us that they can tolerate a delay into June,” Lewis said. “I am confident that Congress will clear the measure quickly after the Memorial Day district work period.”
But Gen. Peter Schoomaker, the Army’s chief of staff, takes a different view from Lewis. Because the Congress has failed to act, he said the military will be forced slow down its supply operations for the troops. According to the Hill:
Gen. Peter Schoomaker, the Army’s chief of staff, said the Army will be forced to slow down some of its operations’ backbone because Congress decided to postpone the completion of the 2006 emergency supplemental until after the Memorial Day break.
“We have to pull all these levers to slow down,” Schoomaker said at a breakfast sponsored by The Hill. In order to stretch its funds until a new infusion of cash is available, the Army will have to slow down its logistics and supply operations among other things, he pointed out. […]
He added that it is “ironic” the Army has to resort to such measures on the eve of Memorial Day.
Failing to pass legislation to fund the troops seems an appropriate Memorial Day message for a Congress that is on schedule to meet for the fewest days of any Congress since 1948.
***************************************
Not with STOP-LOSS
Reserve officer files lawsuit to force Army to let him resign
By Drew Brown / Knight Ridder
WASHINGTON - When Army Reserve Capt. Bradley E. Schwan sought to resign his commission last year, he thought that getting out of the Army would just be a matter of filing his paperwork.
The 30-year-old West Point graduate had served six years on active duty and two years in the reserves. His eight-year service obligation was over. He was ready to move on to a law career.
But the Army had other ideas. In July 2005, two months after he was eligible to leave the service, Army Reserve headquarters informed Schwan that his resignation request had been denied because the Army was short on officers.
"I'd heard rumors and inklings that they were looking at resignations and deciding whether they'd let people go," said Schwan. "But I thought, well, that can't be right. This is an unqualified resignation. And sure enough, it was denied. I filed a second resignation, but it was denied, too."
Stretched thin by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army is under pressure to keep qualified officers in its ranks.
As the war in Iraq grows more unpopular, and with no end in sight in the war against al-Qaida, Schwan's case and others like it raise questions about the future of the all-volunteer Army and how well it can be sustained.
"You know, if they're going to ask people to serve involuntarily, then this isn't something they should ask only a very small segment of society to do," Schwan said. "We're either an all-volunteer force or a conscription force. You can't really have it both ways."
Schwan argues that by refusing to let him leave the service, the Army is resorting to what amounts to a "back-door" draft.
The term is often used by troops who are ordered to stay in the military beyond their original discharge dates. Those orders, known as "stop-loss," are usually imposed because of combat deployment or personnel shortage, and they can remain in effect for as long as 18 months.
Schwan served an extra year on active duty under stop-loss orders. He says he didn't have any complaints since he "still belonged to the government." But now he believes that he's done his duty.
Federal law requires service members to serve eight years in their initial term. This is usually done by a combination of time on active duty and in the reserves.
Schwan, who lives in Simi Valley, Calif., filed a lawsuit to force the Army to let him go. It alleges breach of contract and fraud. The suit is pending in a Los Angeles federal court.
David Bockel, the deputy executive director of the Reserve Officers Association, said that history offers no clear guide to how cases such as Schwan's may be resolved.
"This is the first mobilization (of the reserves) since World War II, and this is an all-volunteer force," Bockel said. "We're in new territory right now."
The Army says it's refused to let Schwan leave because of the war.
"The Army Reserve is facing a critical shortage of officers and the retention of every soldier is important to our mission to safeguard the United States," said Col. Wanda L. Good, an Army personnel officer, in a letter last July.
Lt. Gen. James R. Helmly, then the chief of the Army Reserve, informed commanders in policy memos in 2004 and 2005 that resignations would be decided case-by-case.
The Army Reserve's authorized manpower strength is 205,000, but its actual strength is around 185,000, according to Pentagon statistics.
Reserve officers can resign if their career fields are at least at 80 percent strength, or if they served in Iraq, Afghanistan or in a domestic security mission since the 2001 terror attacks, or if they had personal hardships, Helmly wrote.
Schwan served in Bosnia, but not in Iraq, Afghanistan or homeland defense. What's more, he's a military intelligence officer, a field that the Army says is below 80 percent strength.
Officers who've completed eight years of service and aren't in an Army Reserve unit can resign as long as they haven't received mobilization orders, said Lt. Col. Bryan Hilferty, an Army spokesman for personnel issues.
But officers who haven't completed eight years and those with reserve commitments "can't just resign," Hilferty said. "We're not McDonald's."
Most officers who ask to resign are approved. Army Reserve officials say that 256 of 432 requests were approved in 2004. In 2005, 505 requests were approved and 190 were rejected. So far this year, the Army Reserve has approved 119 requests and rejected 34.
Military law experts say that other officers have sued because their resignations were denied since the war in Iraq started. Army officials were unable to provide firm numbers.
The government is fighting Schwan's case, citing a clause in the 1952 Armed Forces Reserve Act that says officer commissions "are for an indefinite term and are held during the pleasure of the president."
For the Army and government lawyers, the clause means that commissioned officers can be required to serve until hostilities are over or until the president or military commanders decide that they're no longer needed.
Others disagree.
"Contrary to the government's premise, this does not give the president authority to extend the (military service obligation) of a Reserve officer, but only allows discretion for the early removal of such officers," said attorney Donald G. Rehkopf in court papers filed in support of Schwan's case.
It's also "inconceivable" that the phrase could be construed under the Constitution to mean "a potential lifetime obligation in the apparent never-ending `war' on criminal terrorism," said Rehkopf, a retired Air Force Reserve judge advocate.
Schwan said he "loves the Army and everything it stands for," but feels that he's done his part. "It's not like I'm getting out because I hate the government or I'm against whatever conflicts we're involved in," he said.
Posts
