FederalRepublic.net

The video speaks for itself. Go Jason!

H/T to Hot Air

As an Iraqi Freedom veteran, I know what it’s like to be stuck out in the sand for months on end. I know what it’s like to wake up to a mortar explosion and all you have for cover is a bed frame and some body armor. I know what it’s like to sink your boot into inches of sticky mud after a rainstorm, and I know what it’s like to be in 120 degree heat. But unlike my Army counterparts, I don’t know what it’s like to serve fifteen months in the sandbox. I only served four.

I am in no way discounting what my Air Force comrades and I did while in Iraq. I felt honored to be there, but at the same time, lucky I didn’t have to stay longer than I had to. Unfortunately for many Army and Marine troops, Iraq and Middle East fifteen month deployments are becoming the norm, rather than the exception. It pains me when my Army buddies here in Colorado receive word they’re being deployed again, this time to serve in Iraq for fifteen months, and maybe longer. I’ve heard “Fuck Iraq” so many times from Army friends that it has become a normal event.

Though I agree with the reason why we’re over there and although I am happy that President Bush has not backed down to critics, I’m still concerned over the welfare of those who deploy for extended periods of time. There is only so much the people can do to support the troops, until deployments become overbearing. Too many times I’ve seen good guys get cheated on; too many times I’ve seen guys get divorced; too many times I’ve seen men come home to children they don’t know. Too many times.

The Democrats in Congress are proposing a bill that would match troops’ deployment time with rest time at home. Secretary of Defense Gates has suggested the President should veto it, as the bill would constrain the use of available forces, while further extending troop deployments. While I can see how the Dems’ bill would limit the flexibility of the Armed Forces and commanders, I have to pose the questions, “How much is enough? How many times are troops going to go back to Iraq?”

People argue that those who volunteered to serve our country are required to do their duty and shouldn’t complain. Many people argue that’s the way the military is - you follow orders and get over yourself because it’s your duty to do your job. And while I agree there is a certain responsibility of service involved and that one should consider it is their duty to protect this country, I don’t agree one should never question “why?” Even in wartime, there is a limit to the patience of our soldiers - a limit to how many times they can be deployed and a limit to their will to finish the mission, before they can’t emotionally or physically stand it anymore. And though I agree with President Bush and Secretary Gates that a bill matching rest with deployment time would be detriment to having a well equipped and prepared defense force, I have to wonder, how much is enough?

Food for thought this Monday morning.

When I think of where I was on September 11, 2001, I recall that I really had no clue about the significance of the historic terrorist attacks upon the World Trade Centers. That morning, my high school English class had gone on a field trip to Fort Wayne, Indiana’s main public library to do research for upcoming papers. As we were getting briefed by the librarians on the library resources, I remember the librarian stating that if we were going to use the internet for research, we may find that many news websites may be bogged down due to an incident in New York City. Because I was curious about what happened in New York City, I delayed my research into the true identity of Robin Hood to find out what actually happened.

As I logged onto the computer and brought up the web browser, I remember reading about two commercial jets crashing into the World Trade Centers and how initially, people thought it was a tragic accident. As I read deeper into what was being reported, the suspicion was later confirmed to be a terrorist attack. I remember looking at a friend and just saying “Wow.” I never knew an event of that much significance would change the course of my life or my political thinking.

Days later, I was sitting in my senior economics class watching the latest on the terrorist attacks. While I watched, a news reporter interviewed a woman I suspect was from New York, asking how she felt about the attacks. I remember she said that the attacks were tragic, but she was thankful we had a powerful military to bring the terrorists to justice. In that moment, I felt an overwhelming feeling of respect toward our men and women in uniform, and begin thinking about becoming one of them.

In November of that year, an Air Force recruiter came to my school. I left a lunch table full of friends to go talk to SSgt Branum about the opportunities the Air Force could provide. That same month I enlisted in the United States Air Force and the rest as they say, is history.

September 11 is not just a defining day in my life, but a defining day in the history of our nation. That day our way of life was attacked and our constitution challenged. I will never forget the power of pride in the American conscience in those first few months after the attacks, the respect our military received, and the support our nation gave to the city of New York, Washington, and the families of those lost in the attacks. September 11 was my generation’s “Pearl Harbor,” and I will never forget what happened on that day.

As our country travels through a period of transition six years after the 9/11 attacks, I think that we Americans have sort of lost that patriotic spirit we had when we rallied behind Uncle Sam and Lady Liberty. We may not agree that the Iraq War was justified, or that we’ve lost focus on Al Queda in Afghanistan, or even about the leadership of President Bush in these crucial times. But I do think we must remember, that we as Americans are “One Nation Under God,” ready to defend our ideals and our way of life. Today, let us remember what we Americans value and let us turn to God for guidance in these troubling times.

Tonight I was touched by this video. Remember those who have died for our freedom and have defended our way of life around the world:

God bless those brave souls who gave their lives for something greater than themselves.

I don’t even know why this is news:

Soldiers serving overseas will lose some of their online links to friends and loved ones back home under a Department of Defense policy that a high-ranking Army official said would take effect Monday.

The Defense Department will begin blocking access “worldwide” to YouTube, MySpace and 11 other popular Web sites on its computers and networks, according to a memo sent Friday by Gen. B.B. Bell, the U.S. Forces Korea commander.

-Snip-

The new policy is different because it creates a blanket ban on several sites used by military personnel to exchange messages, pictures, video and audio with family and friends.

Even though the media is hyping this up as a new policy decision, it’s really not. In my experience, every base has its own network policies, with each having its own say as to what sites are blocked or restricted. When I went to Iraq, MySpace, YouTube, and even this blog were restricted. Here in the states, those sites are almost *expected* to be blocked for security and “official duty” concerns on government-owned computers and computer systems.

When I was a kid, my first ever “political” memory was watching footage of the first Gulf War. Sitting on the couch with my dad watching ABC News (with Peter Jennings), I remember seeing tracer rounds light up the Baghdad sky. Looking back, I never knew I would serve my country in Iraq sixteen years later.

There’s a special feeling that comes with knowing you served your country. Fortunately, I served my country in southern Iraq. I wasn’t in a combat role, but I did provide communications support for those who were in combat or those who were providing security for convoys. I did my part to keep my country safe and I’m proud I served.

These days, I’m disappointed with what the Democratic Congress is doing with military spending, especially the supplemental called for by President Bush to pay for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. As a conservative, I was disappointed that Democrats rose to power in Congress after the 2006 midterm election. In fact, upon hearing the election returns I literally lost my morning appetite. I was hopeful however, that the Democrats (with influence from moderate “Blue Dogs”) would actually keep their promise to their constituents to do everything in their power to protect the American people. Unfortunately, Pelosi, Reid, and the rest of the leftist kooks in Congress are walking a fine line between opposition to the president’s policies and full-blown treason.

The U.S. Constitution defines treason as “levying war against them [The United States], or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.” With their pandering to the far-left socialists in this country and spouting defeatist rhetoric, the Democratic leaders are dangerously close to treason as defined by the U.S. Constitution. By continuing to play politics with war appropriations bills that they know President Bush will veto, Democrats are in fact affecting America’s war-fighting capability and helping our enemies gain strength. Terrorists may never be able to defeat America’s military capabilities, but they know that by breaking public support for the war effort, Al Qaeda and other organizations will gain the upper hand just as the communists did in the aftermath of the Vietnam War.

I am confident any traction the Democratic Party gained in national security during the 2006 election season has been absolutely wasted by pandering to the far-left. If Democrats in Congress somehow force U.S. troops to “redeploy” from Iraq, not only will Iraq erupt into chaos, but the Democratic Party will be finished as a legitimate political party. For the safety of the troops, the United States, and the Middle East, let us pray the Democrats will wise up to their ways and be willing to compromise with the commander-in-chief.

Interesting article from Townhall.com:

President Bush on Saturday challenged lawmakers skeptical of his new Iraq plan to propose their own strategy for stopping the violence in Baghdad.

“To oppose everything while proposing nothing is irresponsible,” Bush said.

It seems to me President Bush is quite serious this time about making things happen in Iraq. And one of the signs he’s taking things seriously is that within the last few days, he’s challenged members of Congress to come up with their own plan for Iraq, if they don’t like his.

The reality is that Democrats have never come up with a plan of their own for Iraq, instead offering only negativity and obstruction, even since before John Kerry’s 2004 defeat! Democratic leadership has even flip-flopped when it came to the troop surge in Iraq, only arguing against additional troops after Bush’s plan was leaked to the press days before his speech. If that doesn’t open your eyes to what kind of leadership the American people have in Congress, maybe a minimum wage increase that takes more money from Americans’ pockets will.

Tonight, President Bush laid out a plan for a new way forward in his strategy to secure Iraq. Here are a few of the details of his plan as taken directly from his speech:

So I have committed more than 20,000 additional American troops to Iraq. The vast majority of them — five brigades — will be deployed to Baghdad. These troops will work alongside Iraqi units and be embedded in their formations. Our troops will have a well-defined mission: to help Iraqis clear and secure neighborhoods, to help them protect the local population, and to help ensure that the Iraqi forces left behind are capable of providing the security that Baghdad needs.

To establish its authority, the Iraqi government plans to take responsibility for security in all of Iraq’s provinces by November. To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country’s economy, Iraq will pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis. To show that it is committed to delivering a better life, the Iraqi government will spend 10 billion dollars of its own money on reconstruction and infrastructure projects that will create new jobs. To empower local leaders, Iraqis plan to hold provincial elections later this year. And to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation’s political life, the government will reform de-Baathification laws — and establish a fair process for considering amendments to Iraq’s constitution.

In keeping with the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, we will increase the embedding of American advisers in Iraqi Army units — and partner a Coalition brigade with every Iraqi Army division. We will help the Iraqis build a larger and better-equipped Army — and we will accelerate the training of Iraqi forces, which remains the essential U.S. security mission in Iraq. We will give our commanders and civilians greater flexibility to spend funds for economic assistance. We will double the number of Provincial Reconstruction Teams.

And Secretary Rice will soon appoint a reconstruction coordinator in Baghdad to ensure better results for economic assistance being spent in Iraq.

So I have given orders to increase American forces in Anbar Province by 4,000 troops. These troops will work with Iraqi and tribal forces to step up the pressure on the terrorists. America’s men and women in uniform took away Al Qaeda’s safe haven in Afghanistan — and we will not allow them to re-establish it in Iraq.

We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.

We will use America’s full diplomatic resources to rally support for Iraq from nations throughout the Middle East. Countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and the Gulf States need to understand that an American defeat in Iraq would create a new sanctuary for extremists — and a strategic threat to their survival.

Read the full text

A great speech from President Bush tonight. He is still our commander-in-chief and as much as the Democrats complained in their official “response” (which was defeatism disguised as a critique), I fully support the president in his new strategy.

Simply awesome…

United States forces have launched a strike against suspected Al Qaeda members in Somalia, a senior U.S. official tells FOX News.

After the attack by the Air Force AC-130 gunship, capable of firing thousands of rounds per second, the official reported casualties on the ground, but is not sure if any are suspected terrorists.

The U.S.S. Eisenhower aircraft carrier is also in the region, within striking distance and loaded with firepower, and could be called into action if necessary.

The operation would mark the first time the U.S. mounted a mission in Somalia since forces pulled out in 1994, two years after entering on a mission to feed starving people there.

The U.S. could be taking advantage of terrorists that have flown their hideout, as Al Qaeda operatives taking cover in the Somalian capital of Mogadishu were likely chased out when Ethiopian forces cleared out Islamists who had taken power there.

Let’s just say this is long overdue. After Clinton chickened out in 1993 and pulled troops from Somalia, our troops are finally allowed to do something about jihadists and Al Queda in Somalia. This is great news for the United States, Ethiopia, and the long-absent Somali government.

“Our greatest responsibility is the active defense of the American people.” - George W. Bush

Now this is what I call an active defense!

I can’t believe the MSM didn’t pick up on this sooner. I picked it up right away days ago…

Reid’s action was surprising “because a week ago Senator Reid was quoted as saying he would support a surge if there was some plan for withdrawal,'’ said Senator John McCain, an Arizona Republican, in an interview on “Political Capital with Al Hunt'’ to air this weekend on Bloomberg Television. “This is sort of a 180 in a very short period of time.'’

Reid told reporters he changed his mind after learning that U.S. commanders on the ground didn’t think a surge would work.

Source

It’s nice to know Democrats have had a “plan” for Iraq all along.