Savage Pacer - Thoughts on war in Iraq? - Comments

Understood and respected. I

Bob Aman — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 16:13:33 -0600

Understood and respected. I am not cemented into either party, but tend to fall on the side of a " Great American " type view. Which would be a category I would put in for the most part, simply because you care enough to HAVE a civil dialog. This paper, being the people who run it, are ground breakers for dialog like this. I look forward to it's delivery each week, and now the Forum as well. Regards

Well said Bob. I think that

shawn hogendorf — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 19:58:02 -0600

Well said Bob.
I think that replying to these posts is the best way to give two perspectives on an issue.
Thank you for responding to my comment.
To defend myself, I said that I believe in transparency in writers, then went on to say that I lean more liberal than conservative on these issues about the war in Iraq.
So people wouldn't think that my post was unbiased.
It was my opinion, other than the casualty statistics that I got from the American Battle Memorial Commission and the Department of Defense.

I have found what I think is

Bob Aman — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 16:40:57 -0600

I have found what I think is a more accurate version of the John Glenn comments than Shawn or Mark. I think it is because of more believable sources, for my take on this. Also as you read the more accurate account, remember Shawn's comments, and see if you can find way more of the liberal coming out of him than he eludes to in his [unbiased evaluation.]

"I’m sure Bush is intelligent and competent. I just think he should exercise rationality a bit more often. (That is the liberal coming out in me.)"

My findings:
Although by some accounts Howard Metzenbaum did not at any time accuse John Glenn of literally never holding a job, an exchange similar to above did take place over a period of days during the 1974 Ohio primary election in which Glenn battled Metzenbaum for the Democratic nomination for U.S. senator.

Metzenbaum, whose strategy throughout the campaign included questioning Glenn's civilian leadership experience, apparently remarked during a speech that the career Marine and former astronaut had "never met a payroll," or words to that effect. Somehow this morphed into "never held a job" in the press coverage of the campaign (and continues to be reported that way to this day), and Glenn took the straw man and ran with it in a May 3, 1974 debate with Metzenbaum at the Cleveland City Club.

Here, according to political columnist Mark Shields, is what Glenn actually said in that debate (other accounts differ only slightly):

I served 23 years in the United States Marine Corps. I was through two wars. I flew 149 missions. My plane was hit by anti-aircraft fire on 12 different occasions.
I was in the space program. It wasn't my checkbook. It was my life that was on the line. This was not a 9-to-5 job where I took time off to take the daily cash receipts to the bank. I ask you to go with me . . . as I went the other day to a Veterans Hospital and look those men with their mangled bodies in the eye and tell them they didn't hold a job. You go with me to any Gold Star mother, and you look her in the eye and tell her that her son did not hold a job.

You go with me to the space program, and you go as I have gone to the widows and the orphans of Ed White and Gus Grissom and Roger Chaffee, and you look those kids in the eye and tell them that their dad didn't hold a job.

You go with me on Memorial Day coming up, and you stand in Arlington National Cemetery - where I have more friends than I like to remember - and you watch those waving flags, and you stand there, and you think about this nation, and you tell me that those people didn't have a job.

I tell you, Howard Metzenbaum, you should be on your knees every day of your life thanking God that there were some men - some men - who held a job. And they required a dedication to purpose and a love of country and a dedication to duty that was more important than life itself. And their self-sacrifice is what has made this country possible.... I have held a job, Howard.
"What followed from the City Club crowd was a standing ovation that lasted 22 seconds," wrote Shields in appreciation of the event many years later. Glenn beat Metzenbaum in the primary and went on to defeat the Republican nominee and win a seat in the U.S. senate.
The text in the 2004 variant criticizing Democrats for not supporting President Bush's Iraq War was appended several years after this email flier began circulating and has nothing to do with John Glenn's 1974 remarks.

As to the charge, also appended in a later variant, that Howard Metzenbaum worked as an attorney for the Communist Party during World War II, I have found no evidence so far to substantiate it.

My Sources:
Diemer, Tom. "Glenn to Make Farewell Speech at City Club." Plain Dealer, Cleveland, Ohio. 20 June 1998.
Hallet, Joe. "John Glenn Returns to an Old Political Battleground." Plain Dealer, Cleveland, Ohio. 18 December 1998.

Hershey, William. "Sen. John Glenn Closes Chapter in Career Crowded with Achievements, Trials." Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service. 21 Feb. 1997

Shields, Mark. "There Was a Time I Was Sure John Glenn Would Be President." Creators Syndicate Inc. 24 Feb. 2997.
My wish:
I wish people would stop trying to bash, eliminate valuable content, or pretend to be unbiased and speak from one side of the isle, as do most of our news media on TV, print and internet. I'd like to see a forum, or article or comment or statement closer to the [unbiased reporting] demonstrated by Editor Nancy Huddleston. Then I would call it fair and balanced news, and maybe " just a "little" one sided. Keep it up Nancy, you make us proud to quote you, and admit we are from Savage, and the USA. And I think Mr. Glenn's words do apply TODAY, just as much as the words of our Constitution's Framer's do. Unless you have adopted a fast becoming popular opinion today of [they are outdated as well.] !

In response to the above

shawn hogendorf — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 14:46:14 -0600

In response to the above posting, I would like to make the point that statistics and data can be manipulated in many different ways.
I don’t believe that comparing foreign and domestic policies or statistics is fair because there are too many variables that go into each.
We have two wars we are fighting one in Iraq and one in Afghanistan.
We are also fighting a war on terrorism, but that is hard to define.
We also have a domestic violence problem within our borders that needs to be fought.
That being said, I also believe in transparency in writers, so I tend to lean more towards liberals on war issues than conservatives.
The Iraq war policies are a sticky situation, and one needs to be skeptical of any and all numbers they see, especially with a presidential election in our midst.
I agree that the position of commander-in-chief is a difficult job that is why the person holding that position needs to keep an open mind, have a strong supporting cast and must be very intelligent and competent.
If you believe I am ragging on Bush with these comments, I am not.
These are qualities that our president should have regardless of political affiliation.
I’m sure Bush is intelligent and competent. I just think he should exercise rationality a bit more often. (That is the liberal coming out in me.)
I believe that Democrats as well as Republicans are concerned with the way the war is going.
I believe that the concern over how long we are in Iraq is in relation to how many more service members will inevitably die as the war continues, rather than comparing it to how long it took us to clear the Branch Dividian Compound.
Sadaam was a horrible dictator. He persecuted and killed many Iraqi people.
He was a dictator; I don’t know that you can call a political leader a terrorist.
One definition of terrorist is one who utilizes the systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve political objectives, while disguised as a civilian non-combatant.
A second definition states that use should be restricted specifically to references to people and nongovernmental organizations planning and executing acts of violence against civilian or noncombatant targets.
As far as the statement of morale being high in the military, this depends on who you talk with.
But I would never write that morale is high with a definitive exclamation point.
It is subjective in nature.
I am not going to get into the “bias” of the media because that is a whole other subject about objectivity, which I would encourage in a future conversation.
But… One of the objectives of journalism is to inform and educate the public so they can make informed decisions on issues that face them.
I don’t believe that the media preying on “ignorance” would satisfy that objective of the trade.

As for the data above, this is what I found on a few of the statements.
I would like to start by saying that the United States is the only country in the world that has been in constant warfare since 1941.
Now I understand that being the leader of the free world has its cost, but this is a foreign policy issue, which needs to be addressed by both political parties to prevent an ongoing future of warfare and casualties of our brave service people.
Franklin D. Roosevelt did lead us into World War II following the bombing on our soil at Pearl Harbor by the Japanese.
This is true.
But… According to www.abmc.gov/search/wwii.php, the American Battle Memorial Commission there was 405,399 American casualties in World War II, not 450,000, which would bring the average down to 101,349 soldiers per year.
Nonetheless this is an enormous loss for our country during the war.
I would also add that those numbers are American casualties, the war saw over 60 million casualties. Hardly comparable to the war in which we are currently involved.
True, Germany never attacked the U.S. in World War II and Japan did.
World War II was started when Germany invaded Poland and Japan attacked the U.S., Britain, Dutch Islands and China.
We joined forces with the Allied powers in a war that would see over 60 million casualties. Every major world power at the time was involved in World War II.
Let us not forget the millions of Jews that were persecuted and killed by Hitler and Nazi Germany.
The Korean War saw 54,246 American casualties between 1950 and ’53, according to the U.S. Department of Defense. So that number is a fair estimate.
True. Truman did end World War II and was president when the Korean War began.
But… The U.S. and the United Nations retaliated on North Korea after they crossed the 38th Parallel into South Korea with force. So they did not attack us directly, but they were a communistic country attacking a democracy, which we openly supported.
President Harry S Truman ordered U.S. naval and air forces to stem the North Korean advance, but they were not allowed to attack north of the 38th parallel, and especially not into Chinese or Russian territory.
May I add here that Iraq never attacked us either.
Please contribute to this conversation about Iraq. It is an important issue that needs to be addressed.

Thanks Mark for setting us

Nancy Huddleston — Tue, 30 Jan 2007 16:31:51 -0600

Thanks Mark for setting us all straight on the date of John Glenn's comments. But what about the rest of the info here? How long did it take to for the Branch Davidian compound to be taken? What about the death rate of soldiers in World War II? Any takers out there on fact checking some of the rest of the items listed here?

A quick check of the

Mark Nesvig — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 15:12:16 -0600

A quick check of the truth-checking website snopes.com shows that Glenn's comments were actually made in the 1970s and therefore obviously had nothing to do with the current state of affairs in Iraq.

Instead, they've been attached to this widely circulated email and take his comments completely out of context. The "truthiness" of the earlier statements in the email are also highly questionable.

For more information, go to:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/glenn.asp

Mark Nesvig, Savage Pacer Sports Writer, 952-345-6380 or sports@swpub.com

Thoughts on war in Iraq?

Nancy Huddleston — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 13:00:29 -0600

Here's some food for thought to get the discussion going ...

A Savage Pacer reader sent this to me recently and asked that I circulate it.