Sometimes the best offense is a good delusion.
You know Rep. John Murtha, the guy whose 37 years in the Marine Corps and connections to the military brass made his voice credible when he recently called for “redeploying” US troops away from Iraq.
You probably heard about his recent comment that he wouldn’t join the military today.
In a statement released Thursday, Murtha said: “The military had no problem recruiting directly after 9/11 because everyone understood that we had been attacked. But now the military’s ability to attract recruits is being hampered by the prospect of prolonged, extended and repeated deployments, inadequate equipment, shortened home stays, the lack of any connection between Iraq and the brutal attacks of 9/11, and — most importantly — the administration’s constantly changing, undefined, open-ended military mission in Iraq.”
As a result, he’s being dissed by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Peter Pace.
“That’s damaging to recruiting,” Pace said. “It’s damaging to morale of the troops who are deployed, and it’s damaging to the morale of their families who believe in what they are doing to serve this country.”
So Pace calls Murtha to talk about the issue. “Peter Pace told me this last night: They know militarily they can’t win this,” Murtha said later.
Telling the truth damages recruiting, because we depend for recruits on belief in a fabric of lies. Interestingly, this dependence goes all the way to the top: even the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs believes, or at least says he believes, obvious bullshit:
During the Pentagon news conference Thursday, Pace also predicted that the Saddam Hussein loyalists and other Iraqis who comprise the great bulk of the insurgency will increasingly give up, now that Iraq has approved its own constitution and held elections.Pace said he believes the violence, which flared anew Thursday on one of the bloodiest days in Iraq in months, will abate as more Iraqis become convinced that the December elections will produce a representative government that will improve their lives.
We agree we can’t win militarily, which implies that the insurgency is winning militarily, since all an insurgency has to do to win is not lose. But we figure that nevertheless the insurgency will give up. The Sunnis, among whom the insurgency is strongest, will decide that, despite their minority status in the population and the legislature, their lives are going to improve under the rule of the Shia and the Kurds, and throw in the towel.
This is as crazy as anything I remember Westmoreland saying.
Um, I don't think they used "comprise" correctly. A thing comprises the things of which it is composed. That is to say, the collection comprises its elements. If loyalists and other Iraqis are elements of the great bulk, then the bulk comprises loyalists and others; the loyalists and others don't comprise the bulk.
Not that it matters.
Posted by: Carl Manaster on January 7, 2006 1:20 AMWoops, wasn't paying enough attention. Carl's right. What I noticed was that the article didn't use the common and incorrect "is comprised of", but it still wasn't correct usage.
I removed the offending sentence.
Thanks, Carl!
It's all so much bullshit. I mean, really, how many 18 year olds are going to listen to an old fat fucker like John Murtha.
I worked a Democratic booth a couple of years ago at the equivalent of the county fair and they put the army booth next to us. (deliberate I think) They had a pullup demo and were giving out teeshirts. The shirts said: "pain is the sensation of weakness leaving your body".
Recruiting is sophisticated. Those kids don't listen to Murtha. It's all bullshit.
I never got the impression that Murtha was trying to influence anyone one way or the other about joining the military; his comments, I thought, were strictly his own view of what he would do today, given the fucked up situation in Iraq and the very real possibility that he would be put in an untenable (and damned dangerous) situation for, essentially, nothing. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but that's how I read it when I first heard him making the coment.
So the argument of whether or not his statement affects potential recruits is moot, in my book.
Posted by: Generik on January 7, 2006 2:58 PMWell, I pretty much agree with you, Generik, but Gen. Pace made the argument about whether it influences recruiting. Of course, my position on that is that it's just another of their lies even they don't believe. They know recruiting is tanking because soldiers are getting killed, recruiting promises broken, and veterans treated like shit, just like they know they can't win the war they're fighting. But they've convinced themselves that the lie that Murtha is hurting recruiting is useful, just like they've somehow convinced themselves that the lie that they can win the war is useful.
Posted by: qubit on January 7, 2006 7:32 PMI don't think Murtha was saying people shouldn't join up as much as he was saying he understands why they aren't. Since the military honchos either toe Rummy's line or get fired, whoever's left, in this case Pace, has to claim to believe that the problem with recruiting is something other than the lies of the White House and the Pentagon, so they blaim Murtha. That additional lie will hurt recruiting once again, by making it clear that the Pentagon is still committed to lying, and doesn't care how many people die as long as they don't have to admit to the lies.
It's Bush, Rumsfeld, and Pace who are damaging recruiting, and thank God for that.
Posted by: Chuck Dupree (Belisarius) on January 7, 2006 7:41 PM