We're not to blame
A terrorist loaded a vehicle full of bombs, waiting for the moment he could ram it into American Soldiers. Meanwhile American Soldiers were cordoning off a section in Baghdad searching for weapons. In between searches, like we do on nearly every mission, these soldiers passed out candy to Iraqi children.
Today when these soldiers had two dozen children surrounding them, a terrorist rammed the car right in the middle of the children. He killed 27, mostly children and one American soldier.
I listened to the NPR report on the incident from my car after work. The reporter painted the picture perfectly, depicting the horror of such a scene. The reporter also interviewed a grieving Iraqi woman who said, “the Americans are blowing up our children. They are the ones behind these bombs.”
Immediately outraged when I heard this, I parked my car and wondered how anybody could believe that American Soldiers are responsible for a suicide bomber killing children. In the reporter’s defense, she also interviewed a couple Iraqis who posed the question “why attack the soldiers when they’re surrounded by children.”
I just don’t get it. More than half the United States is growing tired of our involvement in Iraq. We get blamed for anything bad. The media rarely has anything positive to report, and anybody with an opinion against Iraq wants to share it (yet still keep bumper stickers on their car).
Today, I’m getting a haircut and my beautician saw my dog tags.
“So you’re in the military, what do you think about Iraq.”
“Well, I just got back in January.”
“I’m sorry, but I am a liberal and I just don’t think we should be there.”
I had nothing to say. I didn’t feel like educating her. I just sat there and let her cut my mop. I know what we’re doing is worthwhile and no haircut lady or anti-American Iraqi can change that.
posted by Sminklemeyer @ 5:31 PM
18 Comments:
I bet you do get tired of trying to educate idiots. Some people are beyond your help......they have blinders on and refuse to see the truth. And, how can anyone in their right mind blame the soldiers for the unconscionable acts of insurgents who have no qualms about slaughtering innocent children? And, they think it's God's will?? How can anyone believe that??? There's one thing that you can count on, though, the fact that some people understand...and alot of that is thanks to you and all the other military bloggers. Keep telling it like it is, Casanova, please don't give up.
There are many of us who know why our military is there. It is not only for the Iraqi people, it is for that liberal hairdresser, for me, for my children, for your children, for her children. For the American people, so that we can continue our lives of safety and freedom. So that we can wear what we want to wear, go where we want to go, work where we choose to work, say what we wish to say. And for those like her, would she rather all our troops come home, just to sit and wait for them to get a foothold , so that next time, she can be in the middle of the war zone, along with her children. We must finish the job. Every terrorist we take care of over there is one more that will not be coming into our land. That is so simple, why does anyone have difficulty understanding the purpose?
I, too, no longer try to "educate" those that tell me we shouldn't be there... but I never miss the opportunity to say, "Well, my son is there protecting your right to be wrong." (I sometimes say that with a small laugh if it's a really big guy... liberals can be quite violent when provoked.) And I sometimes add, "'cause if al-Queda gets its way, you'll have no rights... you'll be dead."
All the benefits of an Iraqi democracy would be equaly futile to explain -- they're not usually interested in learning anything.
I'm surprised the Iraqi kids getting killed with the soldiers handing them candy hasn't gotten more coverage in the press. It seems lost with all the news about the space shuttle and other things.
About the "liberal idiots' comments: America is about people being able to think for themselves and not have to march in lock-step with the government. I don't know why military blogs label anyone who questions why we are in Iraq "liberals." I think you need to get outside of the military community once in awhile to appreciate the range of feelings and ideas people have about the best way to fight terrorism. Is it by being in Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9-11, or by being in Afghanistan trying to find Osama bin Laden who masterminded the attack? Don't take it personally as a soldier if someone doesn't agree with how Bush is fighting the war on terrorism.
I hope her cutting skills are better than her social skills.
Ellen@BestBlogContest said...
I don't know why military blogs label anyone who questions why we are in Iraq "liberals."
Re-read the post before you start critisizing. The "beautician" called herself a liberal, he didn't. (You liberals are all alike)
To Mr. Sminklemyer: You need to go to a Barber Shop instead of a Beautician.
ug.....
I've heard about things like this happening, as Strykeraunt mentioned. Makes my blood boil to think that anyone believes this is OUR fault... WHO brought the bomb? WHO blew it up? And WHO targeted the kids, who just happened to be around our Soldiers? Not the Americans, you fools... the insurgents did all of that.
Get a clue.
Don't know how you managed to hold your tongue while getting your haircut either- you show amazing restraint time and time again.
Hi Mr. Sminklemeyer,
I applaud you for your restraint when you come across these fools. I would have had to take my business elsewhere. Thank you “Some Soldiers Mom”…..I am going to borrow your line, seems like that would shut them up!
Just be strong, buddy. Do what you know is right, people over stateside aren't getting the whole story. Don't let them bring you down. You are doing more good than they will ever know.
My brother and my girlfriend's brother both served in Iraq and both came back with nothing but positive messages. Keep it up!
1.] First off, in fairness to the woman who blamed us, grief makes people blind sometimes. Some of my family blame the president for my nephew's death in Kuwait in 2004.
2.] Jill, many soldiers coming home "cannot" talk about the war, it's too hard for them with what they have seen and done
3.] if the silent "majority" remains silent much longer we may not have an America to defend
4.] ellen@bestblogs and others here, let me share something that drew very little media coverage:
Iraqi 9/11 connection validated in court case
I want to re-print a posting I made some time back on my first blog. It is an interesting article that supports the President's actions in Iraq. Wonder why there was so little media coverage?
"With Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff For the story behind the story...
Friday, May 28, 2004 11:39 a.m. EDT Iraq and 9/11:
What the Judge Said In light of Thursday's Wall Street Journal report detailing new evidence tying Iraq to the 9/11 attacks, it's worth noting that the only time the question of an Iraq-9/11 connection has been legally tested, the verdict was affirmative. In a woefully underreported decision on May 8, 2003, Manhattan U.S. District Court Judge Harold Baer ruled in favor of two 9/11 victim families who had sued Iraq and others claiming they were culpable in the attacks. The court awarded plaintiffs $104 million based on the Baer's findings.The ruling by Judge Baer - a Carter appointee, by the way - was quite detailed. In fact, we suspect that the reason for the media's near-blackout on the case is because most Americans would consider his findings to be very persuasive.Here, in part, is what Judge Baer had to say about the Iraq-9/11 connection:
"The opinion testimony of the plaintiffs' experts is sufficient to meet plaintiffs' burden that Iraq collaborated in or supported bin Laden/al Qaeda's terrorist acts of September 11. . ."Their opinions, coupled with their qualifications as experts on this issue, provide a sufficient basis for a reasonable jury to draw inferences which could lead to the conclusion that Iraq provided material support to al Qaeda and that it did so with knowledge and intent to further al Qaeda's criminal acts.
"Judge Baer continued:"[Former CIA] Director [James] Woolsey reviewed several facts that tended in his view to show Iraq's involvement in acts of terrorism against the United States in general and likely in the events of September 11 specifically.
"First, Director Woolsey described the existence of a highly secure military facility in Iraq where non-Iraqi fundamentalists [e.g., Egyptians and Saudis] are trained in airplane hijacking and other forms of terrorism. Through satellite imagery and the testimony of three Iraqi defectors, [he] demonstrated the existence of this facility, called Salman Pak, which has an airplane but no runway."The defectors also stated that these fundamentalists were taught methods of hijacking using utensils or short knives. Plaintiffs contend it is farfetched to believe that Iraqi agents trained fundamentalists in a top-secret facility for any purpose other than to promote terrorism.
"Second, Director Woolsey mentioned a meeting that allegedly occurred in Prague in April 2001 between Mohammad Atta, the apparent leader of the hijackings, and a high-level Iraqi intelligence agent. According to James Woolsey, the evidence indicates that this was an 'operational meeting' because Atta flew to the Czech Republic and then returned to the United States shortly afterwards. The Minister of Interior of the Czech Republic, Stanislav Gross, stated on October 26, 2001:"'In this moment we can confirm, that during the next stay of Muhammad Atta in the Czech republic there was the contact with the official of the Iraqi Intelligence, Mr. Al Ani, Ahmed Khalin Ibrahim Samir, who was on 22nd April 2001 expelled from the Czech Republic on the basis of activities which were not compatible with the diplomatic status . . .
'"Third, Director Woolsey noted that his conclusion was also based on 'contacts,' which refer to interactions between Hussein/Iraq and bin Laden/al Qaeda that are described in a letter from George Tenet, the Director of Central Intelligence, to Senator Bob Graham on October 7, 2002. Director Tenet's carefully worded letter included in substance the same allegations, but with less detail, that Secretary of State Colin Powell made before the U.N. Security Counsel on Feb. 5, 2003, in his remarks about 'the potentially much more sinister nexus between Iraq and the al-Qaida terrorist network. . . .'"Both Director Tenet and Secretary Powell mentioned 'senior level contacts' between Iraq and al Qaeda going back to the early 1990s [although both acknowledged that part of the interactions in the early to mid-1990s pertained to achieving a mutual non-aggression understanding]; both mentioned that al Qaeda sought to acquire poison gas and training in its use from Iraq; both mentioned that al Qaeda members have been in Iraq, including Baghdad, after September 2001. . . .
"Finally, plaintiffs also place considerable weight on an article that appeared in a regional Iraqi newspaper in July 2001, two months before the disaster of September 11. This article, a paean to bin Laden, mentions that bin Laden 1] 'will try to bomb the Pentagon after he destroys the White House,' 2] 'is insisting very convincingly that he will strike America on the arm that is already hurting,' and 3] 'will curse the memory of Frank Sinatra every time he hears his songs.' See Exs. 16-18, Naeem Abd Muhalhal, America, An Obsession Called Osama Bin Ladin, Al-Nasiriya, July 21, 2001 [original, translation, and certificate of accuracy of translation]."Because, according to Director Woolsey, 'all publications in Iraq really appear at the sufferance of and with a full vetting by the Iraqi regime,' see Tr. 158, and because of the coincidences and the fact that '[t]here is a certain propensity, I think, on bin Laden's part and on Saddam's part ... to try to communicate in somewhat vague terms,' Director Woolsey concluded that there is a probability of a vague foreknowledge of what was contemplated. See Tr. 159." [End of Excerpt]
Judge Baer also found the testimony of terrorism expert Dr. Laurie Mylroie persuasive, writing:"Dr. Mylroie described Iraq's covert involvement in acts of terrorism against the United States in the past, including the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993. Dr. Mylroie testified to at least four events that served as the basis for her conclusion that Iraq played a role in the September 11 tragedy:
"First, she claimed that Iraq provided and continues to provide support to two of the main perpetrators of the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993. Specifically, Abdul Rahman Yasin returned to Baghdad after the bombing and Iraq has provided him safe haven ever since. See Tr. 175-76. Also, Ramsey Yusef arrived in the United States on an Iraqi passport in his own name but left on false documentation - a passport of a Pakistani who was living in Kuwait and whom the Kuwaiti government kept a file on at the time that Iraq invaded Kuwait. See Tr. 174.
"Second, she noted bin Laden's fatwah against the United States, which was motivated by the presence of U.S. forces in Saudi Arabia to fight the Gulf War against Iraq. See Tr. 177.
"Third, she noted that threats by bin Laden in late 1997 and early 1998 which led up to the bombing of the U.S. embassies [on August 7, 1998] were 'in lockstep' with Hussein's threats about ousting the U.N. weapons inspectors, which he eventually did on August 5, 1998. See Tr. 178-79.
"Dr. Mylroie concluded that 'Iraq, I believe, did provide support and resources for the September 11 attacks. I agree with [Iraqi defector] Captain [Sabah] Khodada when he said that ... it took a state like Iraq to carry out an attack as really sophisticated, massive and deadly as what happened on September 11.' See Tr. 182." [End of Excerpt]
To be sure, Judge Baer also noted that the case for Iraq's involvement in 9/11 is far from a slam dunk, concluding, "Plaintiffs have shown, albeit barely, 'by evidence satisfactory to the court' that Iraq provided material support to bin Laden and al Qaeda."Nevertheless, that's a far cry from media claims - not to mention President Bush's incredibly ill-advised statement last fall - that there's no evidence tying Iraq to 9/11.
5.] 'nough said!
Thank you for doing what you do regardless of others oponion. I have not walked in your shoes nor would I want to because I wouldnt be able to do it. Thank you.
I run into those types frequently, I have my pre-thought responses to them...
running from polite to very rude...lol
Just depends on their level of stupidity, as to which response they get.
You always open my eyes Smink, thanks for reminding me why we are there.
Everyone should read Karl Zinmeister's articles in "THE AMERICAN ENTERPRISE" magazine. He gives the positive side of what is happening in Iraq and has been an embedded reporter on three different occasions
Thank Bush for bombs.
"I just don’t get it. More than half the United States is growing tired of our involvement in Iraq. We get blamed for anything bad."
No you don't get it. "we" the half of us inthe US who are growing tired of our involvement in Iraq don't blame you (the soliders) but our administration for getting you (the soliders) in this mess. We are upset with the war and the so called reasons why we are there, we are not blaming you at all. Please try to understand that. The hairdresser did a really poor job of expressing herself and respecting what you've done. And yes, I do have family and friends who were over there and are still. I can support them but I do not have to support the current administration and their decisions for "freedom and world peace". thanks for writting, I really enjoy it and it is quite an eye opener. I plan on passing in around to all my bleeding heart folks. although most of the posters are a bit less thoughtful and sensitive (love the sensitive story, and I'm glad you've changed) - it is good to listen to others, its is amazing what you can learn. - aru
Happy new year 2008 to everybody!
sportsbook
http://www.enterbet.com
Ancelotti said:king tours "We are sure that, when he left England, they didn't have a tear on his tendon. We are sure of this."He had a calf problem. The MRI showed this problem, but the tendon was clear. He had a problem at the start of the season with inflammation on his tendon, had treatment and came back to play for us and the national team.
"I don't know what happened after he left England. I haven't asked him because I haven't seen him. I trust my doctor at this club, and we are sure. I can say this: he didn't have a tear on his tendon when he left England."
http://www.kingtourscom
Post a Comment
<< Home