What exactly happened on 9/11/01?

briannell · Post by **briannell** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 1:19 pm

I think we've strayed way too far off the original topic of this thread. i've strayed a great deal a least.

I think we have been taught that violence is the answer to violence. i just can't believe that there was no other option than to invade Iraq. since I'm an Army brat and wife I can get too sensative when people with no military affiliation start pushing for our troops to kick Iraqs a**.

I think those individuals with affiliation to the military can weigh the price better than they can. it's not just the soldiers that make the sacrafice for freedom but the families as well.

We don't watch the news, but read on the internet, because everytime a soldier is killed my 6 year old thinks daddy is next. Even better is when they come back from being gone a year and the kids freak out, because they don't know thier parent anymore. children don't understand why thier parents leave them for such long periods of time, they don't get 9/11. i think those images are destructive to small kids. i'm glad they are not shown on TV anymore.

as for my personal dislike of being an Army wife, i would be more supportive if given the choice. with us Brian's MOS is SOO needed when he wanted to ETS, they laughed. HE's an RA, so he doesn't owe time, and had to pass on jobs offered him, because the Army wont release him. According to that dotted line he signed, that should only be the case with reserve officers, not RA's. that is my gripe. we do want to try to be a " normal" family, but looks like he'll just be a check until Bush says he can leave. He'll draw good money as major and will retire with good pay. they can't keep him pass 30 years

, so only 21 to go.

-rebecca

El_Gato · Post by **El_Gato** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 4:11 pm

rebecca,

I'm sincerely not trying to "rub salt" in your emotional wounds or be a smartass, I'm just confused by your last post. You make it sound like the Army is doing some "hanky-panky" in order to keep soldiers like your husband in action longer than they are committed to. Is that the case? Or is it a seldom-used loophole or some other method that is not "normal" in order to keep guys in the field longer than they anticipated?

What I'm getting at, if Brian wanted out, why exactly couldn't he get out? Is the Army doing something illegal by keeping him in or just something unexpected? I admit I don't know all the terms and acronyms so please explain in layman's terms, if you don't mind. I'm just curious if/how they're keeping soldiers past their committment, if that is what you explained above happened to Brian.

briannell · Post by **briannell** » Mon Jul 11, 2005 5:05 pm

el gato- an RA officer is a regular army commisson, not a reserve officer. Very few (mostly west point grads) get this distinction. two came from MSU in '96 Brian and Tealla Martin. This is actually very impressive for a school like MSU that has a rather small ROTC program. a reserve officer has a loop hole that lets them be recalled back up to 8 years from leaving the service. Now 99% ROTC are reserve officers.

YES, there are loop holes seldom used in order to retain specialties the Army is desperate for, generally these are the medical officers (which Brian is one). Basically, the Army retains you without really your expressed consent, but fast track you promotions to upgrade your pay and they will pad it with extra benefits. the Army needs Brian's skills with chemical and biological hazards/environmental engineering, so the Army will promote him to major early. they have given him a Lt. Col., head chief position at a duty station of choice (Ft.Lewis) and have agreed in 3 years to let him more back to Bozeman for PhD program which the Army will pay all expenses, give him full pay plus benefits, and housing allowance. He is now assured Lt. Col promotion and allowed to return to Ft. Lewis to either retire/stay to full bird or allowed to go teach at West Point until needed by the Pentagon again.

so good, somewhat because we will get Bozeman in 3 years, but bad because he had to bypass a job out of missoula, and one out of hamilton. Both he really wanted to take just for family stability. plus wife REALLY likes missoula county, and he needs brownie points.

he's missed both pregnancies and with another 18 month deployment a real possibility this coming November, he's either going to have to agree to yet another baby (to make me happy) or buy me nice log home to live in while he's gone.

this is called avoiding divorce 101

-rebecca

WYOBISONMAN · Post by **WYOBISONMAN** » Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:53 am

I gotta chime in on this one......I support our troops 100%......but Iraq was a war started because of lies to the American people by George Bush. Let's get an exit strategy and get the troops out. We never should have been there in the first place. Shame on President Bush for lying about Iraq!

mquast53000 · Post by **mquast53000** » Tue Jul 12, 2005 8:50 am

WYOBISONMAN wrote: Let's get an exit strategy and get the troops out.

We should create an exit strategy and present it to the American people. The strategy should set a date when our last troops will be pulled out of Iraq so that all the insurgents can lay low until that date and strike all the military and police posts ran by the Iraqi people and create yet another terrorist supporting regime… What a wonderful plan! Might as well end her like our last war in Asia... Baghdad can be the new Saigon!

briannell · Post by **briannell** » Tue Jul 12, 2005 11:27 am

I agree with BBG- in that it is a shame on our country to see soldiers and their families on welfare. I'm talking enlisted, officer's fare well, i can't complain with benefits hubby clears 90K (no bragging, just fact) although enlisted are poor as spit. very proud to wear our uniform, have just as much honor as officer's & some more so than, but get paid nothing!

I am proud that Brian has served, my whole family has, but when you feel done and want to move on there should be limits as to how long they can backdoor draft you. they recalled reservist for 18 months, we're being kept in an extra 6 years. nice that they pad it for us, but we'd really like to be done with it.

all the environmental engineers that brian served with that were released to civilian life were given 30 days notice to report for 4-6 years active duty. really sucks for their families.

-rebecca

iaafan · Post by **iaafan** » Tue Jul 12, 2005 12:27 pm

Serving the military can be very difficult and requires unfathomable sacrifices from almost every angle (family, personal, mental), so this is why those in office need to be sure that what they are doing is worth all that.

When leadership falters in this way, the whole nation begins to falter. No one wants to join a military or be in a military that is at the whim of the president. Without that trust, we have big problems.

'93HonoluluCat · Post by **'93HonoluluCat** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 5:57 pm

iaafan wrote:Quite a few people think the whole thing was set up by Bush and his cronies.

I think they're the same people that say it was a setup that the hostages in Iran were released within such a short time after Reagan trounced Carter in the General Election.

I, for one, think the nation has lost its focus. 9/11 was arguably the December 7th of our time, and yet we bicker and squabble about our reaction. I hate to imagine our world if we had such squabbling after the Pearl Harbor attack: Japan would be a pan-Pacific nation, and all of Europe would be speaking German.

While I grant the severity of 12/7/41 was greater than that of 9/11/01, I still believe it (9/11) was a wake up call for our nation and our allies. The difference between 12/7 and 9/11 is after 12/7 as a society, we woke up. After 9/11 all we did was hit the snooze button.

Post by **SonomaCat** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 6:12 pm

I'm still looking for these mysterious people who are asleep or not vigilant about addressing the threat of terrorism to our country. Can somebody please point me in the right direction so I can figure out who they are?

Methinks that's a bit of conservative mythology/spin at work used to try to tie oppostion to the war in Iraq that has nothing to do with 9-11 to some sort of theory about "naive liberals" not recognizing the threats to our country from terrorists.

I think the evidence supporting a war against Japan and Germany was also a touch stronger than the faulty evidence our current leaders relies upon. If it had turned out that Japan had nothing to do with Pearl Harbor, then I think there would have been a whole lot of people bickering about going to war with Japan. Fortuntely for those making the decisions, they had pretty good evidence supporting their assertions that Japan was indeed an imminent threat to America.

If the nation has lost its focus, I believe it has little to do with a lack of appreciation of the threat of terrorism in the world -- it is more likely a function of a lack of faith in our leadership.

iaafan · Post by **iaafan** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 9:13 pm

OK, I'll play along and compare apples to oranges. The Iraq War is closing in on the same duration as WWII, even though we have a much swifter military with a technological advantage unthought of by those involved in WWII.
But it isn't (JMO) that our military personal, especially those from E-1 to E-4 are poorly trained or don't have good equipment. It's something else. I think the people in the military, esp. those from E-1 to E-4 are equal to their WWII counterparts, but the LEADERSHIP they are receiving is inferior. None of these Generals/Admirals is comparable to, or memorable, like Ike, Patton, Bull Halsey, Chesty Puller, etc. from what I can tell.

iaafan · Post by **iaafan** » Thu Jul 14, 2005 9:17 pm

HC93 will love this:

"The mail service has been excellent out here, and in my opinion this is all that the
Air Force has accomplished during the war."
- Chesty Puller in a letter to his wife while in Korea

http://www.military-quotes.com/chesty-puller.htm

Go to that site for some great Chesty quotes. Ooo-Rah!

Hell's Bells · Post by **Hell's Bells** » Fri Jul 15, 2005 1:15 am

WYOBISONMAN wrote:I gotta chime in on this one......I support our troops 100%......but Iraq was a war started because of lies to the American people by George Bush. Let's get an exit strategy and get the troops out. We never should have been there in the first place. Shame on President Bush for lying about Iraq!

1) rebecca it actually looks like your hubby has a good job...all you need is a little pacients, which is hard understandablly with somebody in your shoes. uncle sam is set up to pay your hubby for his services...pay for his school, not to mention every place that will be begging for his services once he finally can retire *just think about it....living in the MT city of your choice*

2)wyo...dude...bush did not lie, there is satalite photos of trucks leaving iraq for syria *scarey....isnt it*. even so...we got rid of a guy who

1) tried to assisanate the first president bush...i know kinda petty and should have been delt with then but we are dealing with it now by what i have read. We would not have put up with one of our guys trying to assisanate the president of another counrty

2) he is responsible for a million of his countrymen's death and there is this gassing of the kurds along with general harassment/torture

3) face it...you are glad sadam is gone

ok sorry for getting this discussion off track and now i am getting off of my soap box

***edit*****

just me but i really dont think that the statement that you support the troops but you dont support the job they do can fly....if you support the troops support them by incourageing them to do their job, get iraq stable and strong, which is what they are doing right now, so they can go home. is it just me or would it be very stupid if we pulled out and allowed a super iran to dominate the mid east *iraq and iran* we did the same thing in vietnam and allowed for the murder of millions of vietnamese in s.e. asia after we left by a murderous govermen that still harasses christains, hmong, and other people that do not conform to vietnamese standards...sounds like nazi germany doesnt it??

briannell · Post by **briannell** » Fri Jul 15, 2005 9:15 am

1) rebecca it actually looks like your hubby has a good job...all you need is a little pacients, which is hard understandablly with somebody in your shoes. uncle sam is set up to pay your hubby for his services...pay for his school, not to mention every place that will be begging for his services once he finally can retire *just think about it....living in the MT city of your choice[quote

]

Yes, from the surface it looks great, but I would be happy to give up the money, school, and even the chance to move home to Montana just to have had him available for the 21 months Anessa was in critical care at Children's Hospital in Seattle. we've been blessed beyond measure to have had the great care Children's provided (and the army paid for ), but there's more medical care to come, and still no dad around.

my gripe is personal, so I really shouldn't weigh in on this thread.

-rebecca[/quote]

iaafan · Post by **iaafan** » Fri Jul 15, 2005 9:37 am

Rebecca: I think you should weigh in on anything related to Iraq. Your comments have been very insightful. Thanks.

They sure beat some of these droned out, cookie-cutter responses we get from the so-called patriots, who consider themselves as such because they know how to wave a flag. I can't believe they have the audacity to say things capable of, and probably intended to, making you feel as if you shouldn't post.

Bleedinbluengold · Post by **Bleedinbluengold** » Fri Jul 15, 2005 11:07 am

iaafan wrote:OK, I'll play along and compare apples to oranges. The Iraq War is closing in on the same duration as WWII, even though we have a much swifter military with a technological advantage unthought of by those involved in WWII.
But it isn't (JMO) that our military personal, especially those from E-1 to E-4 are poorly trained or don't have good equipment. It's something else. I think the people in the military, esp. those from E-1 to E-4 are equal to their WWII counterparts, but the LEADERSHIP they are receiving is inferior. None of these Generals/Admirals is comparable to, or memorable, like Ike, Patton, Bull Halsey, Chesty Puller, etc. from what I can tell.

I emailed Vowell. Therefore, you email General Powell and let him know your thoughts.

I'm doubled over with laughter at your comments. Our NTC is the second best battle field in the world. The only one better is the real thing. After the fall of the Soviet Union, high level Soviet generals visited the NTC, and they were SHOCKED at the sight of it, and told us that they realized how much they would have suffered on a real battlefield against the U.S. military. The other thing that's really funny about your comment, is that the U.S. military instills her battlefield officers with the same strategies for success that the Generals and Admirals, above, used. You forgot a couple though, Sun Tzu, Napoleon, and Robert E. Lee are also highly studied. Interestingly enough, Grant isn't studied much from a positive standpoint. The realization is that sometimes, superior numbers, resources and supply lines will trump superior strategy.

briannell · Post by **briannell** » Fri Jul 15, 2005 11:44 am

Rebecca: I think you should weigh in on anything related to Iraq. Your comments have been very insightful. Thanks.

They sure beat some of these droned out, cookie-cutter responses we get from the so-called patriots, who consider themselves as such because they know how to wave a flag. I can't believe they have the audacity to say things capable of, and probably intended to, making you feel as if you shouldn't post.

thanks - but my views of Army life & Iraq are skewed. I was blessed to have a "fill in" husband for the hard times when Brian was unavailable to me and the kids either physically or emotionally due to his Army responsiblities. that person's friendship means the world to me, and Brian admits he is lucky that this individual isn't looking for "instant family", because he could have had his, especially had Anessa died this last time around. The Army is not good for families, proud of Brian's service, but do not feel the War in Iraq is worth my marriage and children.

All military families are in my prayers and i hope that we are able to bring their loved ones home soon. For those who've lost loved ones protecting our freedoms here at home, i can not put into words my immense sympathy or gratitude for their sacrifice.

-rebecca

iaafan · Post by **iaafan** » Fri Jul 15, 2005 1:31 pm

Like I said, I'll play along, which means if someone wants to look at things in a certain I will do the same in an effort to show that you can spin something two ways. I'm not doing so to show that I've got a valid point, just so whomever can see the weaknesses of their comments.

And thanks for letting me know you're 'laughing at my comments' and so on. Boy, you really got me there. You seem to use the personal attack angle whenever possible, which is fine, but you should know that most reasonable people pick up on that right away. I also realize you try to be subtle with it when possible, which truly has been laughable.

Bleedinbluengold · Post by **Bleedinbluengold** » Fri Jul 15, 2005 2:34 pm

Personal attack?

I was told once that it doesn't matter your intention when you say something, all that matters is how it is perceived. Thus, if you perceived that I personally attacked you, I apologize, because I didn't intend to call you a condiscending name.

The leadership comment was just plain wrong for the reasons I pointed out. That's probably all I should have said.

I don't think you are an idiot or anything like that. I like your posts because they are mostly thought-provoking. I'm on your side quite a bit, but I like taking a side on an issue, because that's the fun part. Sorry for offending you.

I must be a little edgy this week - I pissed off Grizlaw, too...

iaafan · Post by **iaafan** » Fri Jul 15, 2005 2:36 pm

What we have is a military built to devastate another military like ours. It is what the leaders have built for us. However, we aren't fighting that kind of enemy and our leaders seem to be slow on forming something capable of combatting this. They need some with a vision like Patton, Ike, Halsey or someone with balls like Puller. They definitely don't have anyone like ol' Chesty, that's for sure.

Post by **SonomaCat** » Fri Jul 15, 2005 2:50 pm

I don't know, I think Chesty was overrated.

That's about all the more dissent I can throw into this one either way, but I figured I'd give a token effort.