Military Dissenters Go Public
The group of 1000 active duty military dissenting from the war in Iraq that I wrote about a 
few weeks ago have formally gone public.
After holding a press conference Monday, they presented their appeal to Congress on Tuesday to end the war and bring the troops home.
Only Rep. Dennis Kucinich was on hand to join them -- the other 200-some-odd House Democrats apparently AWOL. I mean they're against the war and everything, but heck, showing up on the Capitol steps with actual soldiers who have done the fighting and want to voice their protest, well, that's apparently just too much to ask. They must be too busy Taking Back America. :)
Some good news: I just heard Kucinich say on MSNBC there would "likely" be a congressional hearing on the Appeal. Maybe some Democrats would show up for that.
You can see more about the Appeal For Redress by clicking here.
And the Washington Post has put up a podcast with Appeal founder and organizer, Navy Seaman Jonathan Hutto (photo: upper right).
few weeks ago have formally gone public.
After holding a press conference Monday, they presented their appeal to Congress on Tuesday to end the war and bring the troops home.
Only Rep. Dennis Kucinich was on hand to join them -- the other 200-some-odd House Democrats apparently AWOL. I mean they're against the war and everything, but heck, showing up on the Capitol steps with actual soldiers who have done the fighting and want to voice their protest, well, that's apparently just too much to ask. They must be too busy Taking Back America. :)
Some good news: I just heard Kucinich say on MSNBC there would "likely" be a congressional hearing on the Appeal. Maybe some Democrats would show up for that.
You can see more about the Appeal For Redress by clicking here.
And the Washington Post has put up a podcast with Appeal founder and organizer, Navy Seaman Jonathan Hutto (photo: upper right).
January 16th, 2007 at 3:43 pm
I’ll certainly applaud these people for their efforts but from someone who pooh pooh’ed the efforts of Cindy Sheehan and denounced UFPJ and A.N.S.W.E.R. for being the wrong sort of people why do you think 1,000 unifromed personnel ( out of a strength of 1.2 Plus Million active and 500,000 Guard and Reserve) will make any impact?
Sorry that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid didn’t greet them at the Capitol Steps with Sweets and Flowers. Guess they forgot to shop up!
January 16th, 2007 at 7:35 pm
the other 200-some-odd House Democrats apparently AWOL.
Now you’re just being petulant.
January 16th, 2007 at 9:18 pm
Yada Yada Yada Dept: Where we learn it’s all been a jinx. As Lou Reed’s junkie says of the OD: “it’s called “Bad Luck.”
http://www.slate.com/id/2157663/
January 16th, 2007 at 9:18 pm
Tell us again, Marc, why you don’t like Kucinich?
January 16th, 2007 at 11:07 pm
I personally see Kucinich as the only presidential hopeful with credibility. Hillary has alienated the left. None of the others will even consider cutting a penny for this war, which makes anything they say pure rhetoric. No wait. I stand corrected. Obama said he’s going to “look into” the possibility of cutting funds, right? Wow. I feel more represented already.
January 17th, 2007 at 12:09 am
Hi Andrea, glad to see u here.
Can’t say the same about Bunkerbuster. BB u’ve sort of been demolished by the barrages from Jcummings. Ur gonna be pickin’ the shrapnel out of your duff for the foreseeable future.
I never said I didn’t “like” Kucinich. I said he was doomed as a presidential candidate. Which he is, regardless of the endorsement from my pal Andrea.
Now, back to picking the lead out of ur rear. Or, if u prefer, back to your dopey temporizing of judeophobe Ahmadinejad.
To Lo Cicero: Let’s see if I got this right, Richard. A guy who knows as much about politics as you do really can’t figure out the political difference between an anti-war statement coming from the front of the Workers World Party or one coming from a thousand active duty U.S. military? You’re kidding, right? You’re gosh-durned right that I am going to stand by my poopoohing of ANSWER (led by WWP ) and the UFPJ (led by ex-CP’er Leslie Cagan) while renewing my endorsement of the military Appeal. You ask if I think it will make much difference? Well… given the inability of Congressional Democrats to endorse a simple appeal from uniformed troops, I suspect not.
In fact, I dont think the Democrats will have much of any effect of stopping the war. Looks like, in the end, they will leave that job to scared Republicans, sometime down the road.
January 17th, 2007 at 6:27 am
Actually Andrea, Kucinich is not the only Democratic presidential hopeful who has come out strongly against the escalation. John Edwards has been very forthright about his opposition to any escalation and has called on Congress to block funding for new troops and to push for an immediate withdrawal of 40,000-50,000 soliders from Iraq (the statement is here: http://johnedwards.com/news/press-releases/20070109-escalation/). I like Kucinich myself, but I don’t think that he has much of a chance of gaining a hearing outside of the circles of the already converted (to put it gently). Edwards is saying all the same things, but he has a much better chance to actually get the nomination and beat McCain.
Just thought that was worth noting.
January 17th, 2007 at 6:37 am
Hmmm… we might ask, can we tell the diference between a full bore, pro war speech delivered by Rush Limbaugh and one delivered by Christopher Hitchens? If so, why try and trivialize it?
January 17th, 2007 at 9:37 am
…they presented their appeal to Congress on Tuesday to end the war and bring the troops home
I’m for ending the war and bringing home the troops–after our mission is successful.
January 17th, 2007 at 10:16 am
Marc you didn’t answer the question. I repeat how will the signatures of less than one tenth of one percent of the serving forces on a petition for redress get any attention. I could have gotten TWICE that number during Vietnam to protest regs on hair length!
January 17th, 2007 at 10:48 am
rlc, the media drags out every person who represents their side (liberal) and ignores those voices who oppose them. You can have twenty retired generals supporting a military mission, but the press will find that one opportunist in opposition and tout him as the voice of servicemen who aren’t heard. There are parents of soldiers in Iraq who support our war effort, but Cindy Sheehan gets the press.
Statistically meaningful numbers don’t matter to the press–only perceptions that they can mold.
January 17th, 2007 at 11:40 am
Sorry Woody you lose me there. The press has not been climbing over itself to report the Petition that Marc talks about and it sure hasn’t trumpeted the polling data from MILIARY TIMES showing the widespread disenchantment with the Iraq mission among those serving. I just don’t think a petition of 1000 does much good. Don’t like demos eithere. You want to end the war? Pressure Congress which, I think, is getting the message as more and more talk of real legislation that would curb the Bush Administration is being discussed.
January 17th, 2007 at 1:29 pm
NEW YORK FIREMAN APPEAL CITY TO STOP PUTTING OUT FIRES. Five New York Fireman and veterans of the Fire Department today are presenting an appeal to the City that they be excused from putting out fires. ” Fireman should not be called in the midddle of the night to put out dangererous fires, their leader, Lefty Stokes, told a PP reporter.” We are proud to be New York Firemen but this practice has to stop.”
January 17th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
rlc, on this specific issue regarding media, you’re right. I was thinking more about people like Murtha and Sheehan. On the war, just pulling out with the current status of things is not acceptable.
January 17th, 2007 at 3:02 pm
During the Vietnam War, when most who went were conscripts, dissenting would have been a perfectly legitimate activity (which also would have more often gotten them killed by frequent assignments to ‘hot’ zones).
These people are VOLUNTEERS. Professional soldiers all of course. But they chose their profession. Their profession is to carry out the orders of the CIC (as much as I despise him).
They should not be entitled to make any political gestures while also still in uniform. If you are still under contract you are ALWAYS in uniform.
Allowing any form of political activity by serving members of any armed force brings the US closer to many countries where a civilian government must always offer obeisance in some way to military authority (Turkey, Spain, Phillipines, Chile – note these are considered civilized countries).
The entire US system was designed to limit the power of any one entity. This has been broken by Little Bush and his Gang. I suppose they should now reap the rewards.
Little known fact: The US military has a program called STOPLOSS which can legally require a serving member to serve in uniform for ANY length of time beyond the written, contractual date that was originally agreed, if it is determined that losing the services of that person would adversely affect operations.
If STOPLOSS is declared illegal you will see uniformed service members acting politically and properly – by voting with their feet.
January 17th, 2007 at 5:53 pm
Mr Pratt a 1988 law gives them the right to petition for redress and I have no problem with that and the continued redeployments, stop-loss orders, and conversions on non-combat MOS types into “Emergency 11Bs” including sending Air Force(!) personnel in to guard pipelines after a six week course at Benning shows how badly used-up our military is becoming. Make no mistake, there will be nothing left after this and if Bush attacks Iran by air the ensuing ground battle will be worse than the retreat from Chosin in 1951.
January 17th, 2007 at 8:15 pm
“…the ensuing ground battle will be worse than the retreat from Cosin…” I could be wrong, but was it 1951 or later? In any case I don’t agree. We heard in the first Iraq and this one how defeat was just around the corner. Iran couldn’t even defeat Iraq in their war and now their going to make a Chosin? They must have come a long way, baby. And those firemen mentioned above want to decide what fires they will put out, not the authorities downtown. Really, is that the way you want it?
January 17th, 2007 at 8:31 pm
I thank Marc for the compliment about the barrage. I will add that I have to give that barrage way too often among 18-25 yr old “leftists” these days. Not an hour ago I was at a class (doing MA in IR) and had to listen to some “activist” expoinding the same thing. I am very discouraged at the “I’m not too concerened” attitude towards Ahmedinijad and Holocaust Denial coming from some ultra circles. This is one of the reasons I no longer feel affiliated with Conterpunch or Dissident Voice, etc. as I was (though I love most of their writers and like some of tehm thru correspondance as well) Too little concern….the Sects are actually much better on this one.
January 17th, 2007 at 8:32 pm
I like Edwards too, though my position is closer to Kucinich. If Edwards were too run uncompromisingly on his current politics, Nader or some such may not have to run.
January 17th, 2007 at 9:31 pm
http://tinyurl.com/2clp9b
The Democrats should, legitimately, link their opposition to the war in Iraq and, in particular, the urge for “escmentation” to this:
http://tinyurl.com/2clp9b
It’s not at all a matter of opportunistic rhetoric – it’s about dealing realistically with urgent on-the-ground reality that Bush is, true to form, ignoring because it doesn’t square with his cracked ideological perspective nor the imperatives of his increasingly pathetic ego.
January 18th, 2007 at 7:57 pm
It’s very disappointing that Kucinich was the only Rep. to meet with the Appeal for Redress reps. I’d hoped that there would be several members of Congress speaking at the Jan. 27 rally; now I wonder. (There were several at UfPJ’s after-march concert in September 2005).
On the subject of UfPJ, Marc: For a long time you’ve said your complaint with UfPJ was its not separating itself from ANSWER. They did, as of fall of 2005, and now you’re going to dismiss a huge coalition with a red-baiting swipe at its executive director? At a time when the national march and lobby day could have the effect, clearly necessary, of stiffening Congress’ spine? That kind of distancing and nose-holding on your part makes it _easier_ for pols and pundits to dismiss grassroots pressure to end the war; why do that?
I’d imagine Appeal for Redress representatives will be attending the January 27 demo (and lobby day on Jan. 29). I hope anyone within traveling range who wants to end the war will do so, and if that’s just not possible, will participate in a local, visible action to support the message.
Act now: tell Congress and Bush to end the war.
January 20th, 2007 at 9:19 am
A question. What happens to the Iraqis who helped us and worked for us if we pull out? Or don’t you care?