CBS Sports Analyst Buys into "Crazy Vets" Meme, Insults our Professionalism and Mental Capacity

by: Richard Allen Smith

Fri May 08, 2009 at 18:42:05 PM EDT


CBS Sports golf analyst David Feherty has gone off the deep end, or at least he thinks American Soldiers have.  Check out this quote from Feherty in the April issue of D Magazine:

[I]f you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death.

Wow. There are so many levels on which this is one of the most inflammatory statements about American Veterans and Service Members that has ever been printed.  Evidently, Feherty believes that we are mindless machines of death, who would without hesitation accept a loaded weapon from a stranger in civilian society, and then use that weapon to assassinate political leaders of the country we have sworn to defend. Second, Feherty disrespects the leaders of our most important branch of government by insinuating that, as the old right-wing smear goes, they "pal around with terrorists", or at least ride the elevator together to work in the morning. Third, Feherty, who to my knowledge has never served his country or ours in uniform, makes the assumption that he knows Soldiers and Veterans, and that "any U.S. soldier" has such hatred for (again) the political leaders of the country we have sworn to defend,  that we could not be professional enough to help ourselves from committing murder on the spot.  

What Mr. Feherty might not understand is that there are few Americans who have been as loyal to Veterans and Soldiers as Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.  If I found myself in that proverbial elevator, the first thing I would do is thank them both profusely. Why? Because when I was down range fighting a war in Afghanistan, Reid and Pelosi, with other legislative colleagues were shepherding through their respective houses of Congress the 21st Century G.I. Bill, which is now paying for my college education.

Here is another angle. Last month, around the same time Feherty made his comments about American Soldiers, the right-wing attack machine was busy attacking the Obama Administration and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano over a report requested by the Bush Administration which indicated that radical right-wing groups would attempt to recruit Iraq war Veterans. The American Legion said:

The American Legion is well aware and horrified at the pain inflicted during the Oklahoma City bombing, but Timothy McVeigh was only one of more than 42 million veterans who have worn this nation's uniform during wartime. To continue to use McVeigh as an example of the stereotypical "disgruntled military veteran" is as unfair as using Osama bin Laden as the sole example of Islam.

Where were the Legion and the right-wing spin consortium on a prominent sportscaster slandering American Soldiers. The answer: AWOL. Why? Because the conservative smear establishment doesn't actually care about Soldiers and Veterans.  They use Veterans and Soldiers (including the Legion) as a prop, along side their lapel pins and car magnets, to protect their own desires, which is the destruction, by any means necessary, of those who have truly supported us in the past eight years.  This is the modus operandi of the right-wing, radical, anti-troop, anti-veteran agenda.

Rumor has it, Feherty's comments may make an appearance on tonight's episode of Countdown with Keith Olbermann (MSNBC, 8PM EST).  If Feherty still has a job by the time that show airs, after slandering the professionalism and mental capacity of American Soldiers and Veterans, he will have gone too long without being fired. Feherty needs to go. And every second he continues to be employed by CBS Sports is a second too long.

H/t to Media Matters.

UPDATE: Guess who is the worst person in the world?

Richard Allen Smith :: CBS Sports Analyst Buys into "Crazy Vets" Meme, Insults our Professionalism and Mental Capacity
Tags: , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

CBS Sports Analyst Buys into "Crazy Vets" Meme, Insults our Professionalism and Mental Capacity | 75 comments
You missed your own point! (0.00 / 0)
Gee whiz, Richard, you started out with a fair rebuttal against a CBS wacko who made some really unlikely statements against our fine soldiers.  But then you degenerated into an unrelated, serpentine tirade against some "right wing machine" irrespective of your topic.

Because the conservative smear establishment doesn't actually care about Soldiers and Veterans.  They use Veterans and Soldiers (including the Legion) as a prop, along side their lapel pins and car magnets, to protect their own desires, which is the destruction, by any means necessary, of those who have truly supported us in the past eight years.  This is the modus operandi of the right-wing, radical, anti-troop, anti-veteran agenda.

Of course, this is total bullshit.  In fact, I don't think anyone in the right- or left-wing mainstream has anything but high regard for our soldiers, minus the few right- and left-wing radicals that hate everyone.  Your statements are unfair, untrue, and slanderous, IMHO.   The "destruction" of our soldiers??  Are you even emotionally stable?

You have a right to say whatever you wish, but if you want to maintain credibility, you might consider becoming a bit more rational and fair to those on all sides of issues.

Richard hit the nail on the head... (4.00 / 2)
If you don't think this Feherty clown is part of the right-wing spin machine, then you've been living under a rock.  These chicken hawks love to stand behind the troops, especially when the bullets are flying, but they're full of empty rhetoric.  This is just more of the same BS from these nut jobs that want the American people to think servicemen and women only support good ol' Republicans, although the facts speak otherwise.  And if you want to label someone a partisan, you might want to re-read Feherty's column.  If that's not a biased political slander, I don't know what is.  

I'm curious to see how much longer this poor man's Rush Limbaugh will be on the air.  That is, until Fox News starts covering golf.  

[ Parent ]
Know this.... (0.00 / 0)
...that CBS Sports golf analyst David Feherty is a CBS-hired commentator.  I don't see how that relates to Fox News, Limbaugh, or anything else you might want to consider.

To be honest, I didn't listen to or read his report, so I don't have first-hand info.  Nevertheless, I think you're totally wrong in thinking that Republicans or conservatives in this country have anything but pride and respect for the U.S. military.  If you think otherwise, then you're nothing more than a left-wing nut who sees people only through pink-tinted glasses.

Disclosure: I'm not a Republican or consider myself  "conservative."  I attempt to see the fairness and sincerity in all political circles.  You might want to try that yourself.

[ Parent ]
Maybe you should read the article then (4.00 / 3)
And no, I'm not looking at the world in any sort of tinted glasses.  As a matter of fact, I took the blinders off a long time ago...you might want to do the same.

And why do I think some prominent Republicans use the military as props?  Because I've heard their "pro-military" rants, and seen how their legislative agenda and voting record fails to back up their words far too frequently.  Do some liberals do it too?  Of course.  Is it hypocritical?  Yep.  But then again, I think it's far worse to support ill-advised wars without actually properly equipping the military or developing a strategic plan (Bush and Cheney) than it is to oppose a war yet be willing to support education and health care funding for veterans (Pelosi and Reid).  There's plenty of honorable people on both sides of the aisle, but I think Richard's point on the types of right-wingers that spew garbage like this article is dead on.  

I'll take the latter over the former any day.  

[ Parent ]
Well.... (0.00 / 0)
At least you admitted that there are wolves on both sides of the political aisle.  That's a start.

Due to time problems, I gotta go.  I'd like to spar with you more, later.........

E.R.

[ Parent ]
Yeah but (0.00 / 0)
the Democrats also largely supported intervention in the Balkans, an intervention that had absolutely nothing to do with our national security and could have easily turned nasty for us. Clinton also missed numerous chances to capture or kill bin Laden and basically sat back while the Taliban came to power in Afghanistan. The Clintons also did absolutely nothing to get us off of Saudi oil or off the Saudis in general. If anything, we got even closer to the Saudis under Clinton.  I could also make the argument that some Democrats likely made the passing of the new GI Bill harder vice easier by loading it down with pork(Unemployment benefits???). Nancy Pelosi also seems to believe that enforcement of pre-existing immigration laws is Un-American. We fight them in Afg-Pak but at the same end let them walk in here? Needless to say, the Clintons also had 8 years to secure the borders and don't appear to have done a damn thing. So maybe all of the partisan types on both the right and the left need to remove their blinders.  
[ Parent ]
There was also the time (0.00 / 0)
Clinton rolled over and played dead for the Saudis after they stonewalled our FBI agents attempting to investigate terrorist attacks on our military personnel, but I think my point should be pretty clear by now.  
[ Parent ]
Fred (4.00 / 1)
Write a Post!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

'Hearts and Minds, "The ultimate victory will depend on the hearts and minds of the people who actually live there." -- President Lyndon Johnson
[ Parent ]
Feherty (0.00 / 0)
I got on this blog as a vet to see what it is about.  It is not hard to figure that out.  

What a bunch of left wing spineless stupid people.  Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi has been  part of a bunch of people who have done nothing but take away veterans rights.  The contract that most of the older vets made with this country is null and void as far as they are concerned and you people are not smart enough to see what is in store for you.  I hope you get in bed with  these people because the sex they are going to have with you won't be pretty.  You will be lucky if you don't have to pay them to serve.  Wait til you need them for the health care you were promised.  That will be gone too.

If all the vets on this blog believe what you do we will  be speaking chinese in 10 years.

Old Vet

[ Parent ]
I personally (0.00 / 0)
wouldn't give Nancy Pelosi the time of day. I consider her an utter waste unworthy of my respect in the slightest. I am not a big fan of Harry Reid either. On the other hand, I don't think either one of them belong in the same boat as bin Laden. Needless to say, if you weren't so clearly engaged in partisan shilling here, you would actually have a pretty good point.  
Good point (0.00 / 0)
as in the sense that the US military clearly know better than engage in murdering US govt officials and that there is not one US political figure that belongs in the same league as al Qaeda. The rest struck me as partisan cheerleading, which we certainly do not need more of right now.  
I don't know - maybe I'm one of those crazy vets (4.00 / 5)
If I was in an elevator with the same gun, Osama bin Laden, Sean Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh, I know exactly what I would do.  I would shoot bin Laden twice - once in each knee.  I would make Limbaugh put down the food so I could kick his ass.  Then I would make a deal with bin Laden.  I would let Osama watch as I waterboarded Hannity if he would donate some of his fortune to military families.

Call me crazy.

Now ask me what I'd do if I was stuck in an elevator with Angelina Jolie, Catherine Zeta Jones, and Scarlet Johansson. :)

"No U.S. soldier ever dies in vain because they're carrying out the missions of their commander in chief. And we honor all the service that they've provided." - Barack Obama

Now, THAT was funny! (4.00 / 1)

[ Parent ]
N'yet... (0.00 / 0)
Call me crazy.

Crazy, no way .

I'd like to be there too!

But other than my wife, I'd like to be stuck in that elevator with the likes of Natalie Portman, Sally Field, or Cate Blanchett.

[ Parent ]
Really? (0.00 / 0)
Given your choice of any three women in the world you choose one that is old enough to be endorsing osteoporosis medication?  

I'm on twitter.
[ Parent ]
Hey! (0.00 / 0)
The Sally Field I remember (and will see in that elevator) is the one in "Smokey and the Bandit" back in 1977.  That's just as plausible as seeing her in an elevator with me in the first place!

But hell, I just might have to settle w/ Natalie Portman after all...  Darn.

[ Parent ]
HEYHEY (4.00 / 1)
Not to take that personally, but a person COULD take that personally.  A person might not have osteoporosis but could be older than many who do, so would  be  "old enough to be endorsing osteoporosis medicine."

This person might have a boyfriend who thinks she's extremely hot and actually knows within about 10 years or so how old she could be, which is waaay older than he is.  Not to mention any names.  

Watch it, Richard.  Being a great writer etc. doesn't give you a pass on EVERYTHING ;)

[ Parent ]
I'm not old. (4.00 / 2)
I'm ripe, that's all.
[ Parent ]
And "ripe" is a LOT! Just ask someone I know . . . (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
Don't shoot me! (0.00 / 0)
But, wasn't that David Feherty just being David Feherty? I mean, I don't know if you guys have ever watched a  golf game with him but his dry, dark and sardonic sense of humor can be pretty hilarious...if you're in the right mood, of course.

Granted, I can display a very warped sense of humor, given the right conditions. At the same time, though, it seems that one of the biggest problems with trying to have a healthy debate about anything of critical importance is a complete lack of any semblance of a sense of humor - dry, self-deprecating, or otherwise.

I'm just sayin'...

Sorry Elizabeth--I think that was beyond humor (0.00 / 0)
and ignorant besides.  

His point was that every American soldier thinks that war is just the greatest thing he ever experienced and  harbors antipathy for Pelosi and Reid's lack of hoo-rah for it.  That shows ignorance of the American military, and a low opinion as well.  

Charactering soldiers as crazed killing machines is unacceptable.  That, and discounting everything they've gone through--struggles with drugs, PTSD, joblessness, homelessness--has been a right-wing/chickenhawk/fundamentalist Christianist meme for a while now.  Feherty's just feeding it.

[ Parent ]
You mean like that (0.00 / 0)
piece you posted a little while back about us deliberately targeting civilians in Fallujah???? Please spare us the partisan horseshit.  
[ Parent ]
Where is the "partisan hourseshit"? (0.00 / 0)
in that comment? And watch your tone.

I'm on twitter.
[ Parent ]
Right here (0.00 / 0)
right-wing/chickenhawk/fundamentalist Christianist. Not that there isn't some truth to that, but when someone has posted Muj propaganda, then my response is look who's talking.  
[ Parent ]
right-wing isn't partisan (0.00 / 0)
You've been confusing that term for a while now. There are several right-wing elected officials in the Democratic Party, Republicans who aren't right wing, and right-wingers who are not a part of any party.

I'm on twitter.
[ Parent ]
Actually the definition of (0.00 / 0)
partisan is

A fervent, sometimes militant supporter or proponent of a party, cause, faction, person, or idea.

So we could probably label Republican-Democrat and Right-Left as various forms of partisanship.  

[ Parent ]
Can I try to answer that if I promise to stay on topic!? :-) (0.00 / 0)
The problem, as I see it, with what boadicaea, and countless others, are posting on this issue are the many assumptions that are being made about Feherty that have no basis in fact.

Are you a golf fan? You should have heard what Feherty said to Tiger Woods the other day. Wow! If you didn't know anything about Feherty or that the two men are very good friends, you probably would have interpreted the comments entirely incorrectly. And that's what I believe has happened over this Feherty article.

[ Parent ]
So he knows Tiger Woods, (0.00 / 0)
he doesn't know every American soldier.  

I'm on twitter.
[ Parent ]
Oh come on, Richard!!! (0.00 / 0)
I absolutely HATE it when people tell me I'm missing the point and so, I don't say this without a lot of hesitation and empathy, but you are missing the point! Sorry.
[ Parent ]
Sorry if I'm not getting your point (0.00 / 0)
but I take offense to anyone, let alone someone who has never served, generalizing that every Soldier is an indiscriminate killer who wishes to murder the political leader who passed the most important Veterans benefit bill in a generation.

I'm on twitter.
[ Parent ]
That's OK...my points usually aren't worth getting, anyway. (0.00 / 0)
It's just that David Feherty is one of my favourite golf analysts - don't even ask - and I just think he has really been getting the bum's on this one. The way he is being described would be funny if it wasn't so mean-spirited.

[ Parent ]
I meant to write, 'bum's rap'! (0.00 / 0)
When are we going to get an edit function around here...for morons like myself!
[ Parent ]
well hopefully we get his job (4.00 / 1)
in addition to giving him the bum's rap.

I'm on twitter.
[ Parent ]
One last point, Richard... (0.00 / 0)
At the risk of incurring your wrath - again! - for being off topic ( not that I think Saudi Arabia is EVER off topic around here!), did you feel the same way about Bill Maher when he was fired for remarks about cruise missles being lobbed from 20,000 feet' - comments which were interpreted by many as anti-military? In my view, those remarks were not at all anti-military, but rather comments made against the pols who make policy that the military must execute.

I'm just trying to better understand where you are coming from on the Feherty thing and on calling for his job.

I may never watch golf again without Feherty's colourful analysis!

[ Parent ]
I wonder if this might change your point of view on all of this... (0.00 / 0)
...on David Feherty and the troops...

http://www.postandcourier.com/...

[ Parent ]
I hope Keith Olbermann does a story on that... (0.00 / 0)
...but then again, that would mean he may have to issue a mea culpa...well, stranger things have happened.
[ Parent ]
Hello? General policy on air bombardment drives air (0.00 / 0)
war decisions.   Soldiers on the ground don't make those decisions, if that has anything to do with whatever your point is.  

There were a lot of reports attributing the heavy bombardment to B-52s over Fallujah, in 2004--I am incredibly glad that it wasn't true.  I stated that it wasn't true.  What does that have to do with anything in my comment?  And what is "Muj?"

You haven't been paying attention to the fundamentalist line that compares Iraq and Vietnam veterans to WWII vets and finds them degenerate, lazy, and not deserving of Christian compassion.   I unfortunately hear this sometimes from someone close to me, and have read newspaper articles such as one about a "Christian" Colorado soup kitchen that excluded homeless Iraq veterans based on the above reasoning.  

Whatever your objection to what I say, make it logical--please.   If you would put some effort into writing a coherent article covering the material in all the double-triple comments you write, hijacking threads in every post, you would free yourself to make relevant, appropriate comments.  


[ Parent ]
There was also a piece in (0.00 / 0)
what you posted implying that US Snipers deliberately targeted civilians. That was clearly Muj propaganda and a slam against the troops. I am not a fan of the Right, but to parrot stories such as those regarding B-52s and US Snipers clearly shows a very low opinion of our troops. Not to mention that the propaganda blitz regarding things such as B-52s and deliberate targeting of civilians accomplished nothing, save for ensuring that even more Marines died and emboldening the SMBs, Zarqawi, AQI, and co. So whether you realize it or not, spreading such stories actually aided and abetted Zarqawi and Co and naturally I am just a little bit ticked off about that.

Now, do I get hot under the collar sometimes? Hell yes. But at the same end, you not understanding where I am coming from does not equate irrelevancy of my comments. So maybe you should expand your horizons and adopt a less partisan, more common sense approach. As for the term Muj, I'll let you figure that one out.  

[ Parent ]
I assume that "Muj" is a derogatory way of saying (0.00 / 0)
"mujahedin."  That's another piece of the puzzle--why can't you say the word?  Twenty years ago mujahedin drove the Russians out of Afghanistan.  In Iraq mujahedin were created by our invasion.  

I've heard a lot of insulting terms referring to the people of Iraq, this is just a new one to me.  The derogatory treatment of Iraqis those terms exemplify has killed a lot of Marines; other people than me figured that out a long time ago.

My horizons started expanding in 1967 when I began to learn more about the military tradition my family is so dedicated to.  I haven't stopped learning yet.  The more I learn, the more common sense tells me that throwing American lives away the way we've been doing hasn't helped us or anyone else and it's time to stop.  

[ Parent ]
No (0.00 / 0)
"Muj" was a term we specifically used for the Islamists like Ansar al Sunnah, Zarqawi's gang, the SMBs, etc. So to insinuate that this was a term designed to insult the people of Iraq is outright wrong.  
[ Parent ]
I mean (0.00 / 0)
I still manage to maintain contact with numerous individuals in Iraq and I can guarantee that not one of them would be anything other than jubilated to see the Islamist assholes known as the Muj disappear forever. At the same end, I don't remember meeting too many Fallujans who were sad to see them go. My friends in the IIF and the POB ure hated the Muj's guts too. Albeit they were also very, very afraid of the Muj.
[ Parent ]
So what was your point in telling me I'd have to figure out for myself (0.00 / 0)
what you meant in your comment?  That's really poor communication anyway; now you're saying I "insinuated" what I outright stated (which is a good communication strategy) and how WRONG I am.

Your rhetoric is pretty twisted.  Try being straightforward if you want to get your point across to me--I don't think the way you do and won't catch those double/triple insults.

[ Parent ]
We agree--Islamists are assholes. You do know that (0.00 / 0)
the term "Muj" very probably came from the word "mujahedin," a formerly honorable word.  Why don't you use the word "Islamist" and avoid the silly, unnecessary misunderstanding?
[ Parent ]
Double comment coming up-- (0.00 / 0)
civilians were shot and killed, bombed and killed, in Fallujah.  There was one shooting incident from a rooftop--sniping--that was expanded into an assumption that this was going on throughout the city.

There were enough dead civilians in Fallujah to "embolden" angry Iraqis to fight back.  I probably would to, if that were to happen here.

[ Parent ]
Wrong again (0.00 / 1)
A. The Muj often deliberately wage war in a manner that is designed to cause civilian casualties.

B. With all the disinfo going around, there is no possible way of knowing how many civilian casualties there really were or who caused them. The Muj have been known to kill civilians in an effort to make it appear as if we did it.

C. The Muj are also notorious for employing the use of coercion. If one doesn't tow their line, they can expect to get their tongue cut out and their head cut off. And that's if they are lucky.

D. Last I checked, the Shia are Iraqis too. The Muj happen to have been waging a campaign of genocide against the Shia since 2003. They also happen to have been killing off all Sunnis who didn't accept their Wahhabi ways of running things. War is war but butchering Kurdish college girls in bathtubs and burning little Iraqi boys alive is clearly way above and beyond that. I could also go into how they use 10 year olds to murder ordinary Iraqis, carve innocent Iraqis up with meat cleavers, use rape as a tool to recruit female suicide bombers, and booby-trap an Iraqi policeman's corpse in order to murder the policeman's entire family. There are also certain issues with the Muj. definition of Sharia law, but I think I have made my point.

So to imply that the Muj were some sort of honorable Iraqi resistance is utterly insane. That doesn't even take into account the fact that many of the leadership positions in the Muj are held by foreigners.


[ Parent ]
Your whole essay up there is based on your mysterious request (0.00 / 0)
for me to figure out what "Muj" meant.  I did a pretty good job, considering I never traded Marine talk or tried to confound anyone by using obscure slang to put them in a position where I could take potshots at them.

This is what I meant by please use logic; now I'll add, please don't play your games on this website.  Then we can have a discussion. Nothing you said about the people you were really talking about was new to me.

If you had used the term "Islamist" in your first comment to me here, you wouldn't have had to get yourself all worked up about how nasty they are.  You wouldn't have had to work in nasty remarks to me.  I guess you knew that, didn't you?

Don't look for me to respond to your comments anymore.  

[ Parent ]
Anything that I said (0.00 / 0)
which came across as  insulting, I apologize for. Albeit there is a method to my madness of game playing. I do it to show how little most of the political crowd really knows and in the hopes that it might, just might get people to start thinking, maybe even go looking for answers.

As for the term Mujahideen, Abdullah Janabi and Omar Hadid(Both Wahhabi assholes) were leaders of the Mujahideen Shura Council in Fallujah. The Islamists called themselvs Mujahideen. Needless to say, the Afghan mujahideen were by and large an honorable resistance movement against Communism and I find it rather insulting to them that bin Laden became the poster boy for the Afghan resistance. bin Laden clearly did little of the actual fighting and the Arab fighters were not well liked by the Afghans, except maybe Hekmatyar, who has never been a very nice guy himself. If anything, bin Laden and his Wahhabi brethren have brought the Afghans nothing but hell.

All that aside, the Muj(Wahhabis) were clearly the enemy in Fallujah who happened to be real, real bad guys that almost certainly would pose a threat to the security of the rest of the world, as well as posing a clear and present danger to ordinary Iraqis. We were righteous in defeating them and waged war in the most appropriate manner possible given the situation.

Having said all that, I think now is the time to start seeing more solutions and honest debate on how to destroy these guys, as they cannot be negotiated with, bargained with, nor reasoned with. At the same end, any attempt to nation build in Afghanistan would be utterly futile without destroying the Wahhabis. Sadly, I am seeing less and less honest debate regarding solutions to problems and more and more partisan debate designed to make people feel good about themselves and win points for politicians vice actually solve any problems. People are being slaughtered, oppressed, and denied a better life by the armies of darkness and we are currently in a war which it does not look as if we intend to win. That all needs to change immediately.


[ Parent ]
Bin Laden had Ahmed Shah Masoud--commander (0.00 / 0)
of the (true) mujahedin Northern Alliance, the man who directed that multi-tribal organization to victory over the Russians--assassinated only a week or so before 9/11, in 2001.  Masoud had a trip to Washington DC planned, to warn Bush about the planned attack.  al-Qaeda blew him up.

It fries me, too, that the Wahabbist Islamists who use violence and pretend there's something religious about it call themselves mujahedin.  I understand their resentment of the West, and everything we've done to try to control and use their resources, but Islam never condones what they do.  Mujahedin are those who struggle within Islam--sometimes within themselves--to honor their beliefs.

Nation-building is the only strategy that will defeat the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.  And nation-building needs the support and protection of the military right now.  Both military action and nation-building have to be powerful forces at the same time, because the Taliban preys on poverty and despair and will have power as long as the people are desperate.  The people of Afghanistan know what to do and will, once they are able to.  

So, thanks for the comment.  I'm pretty much with you on a lot of things, but won't diss the people of the countries we've inserted ourselves into.  Those are the regular, non-Islamist people who are just enraged that a foreign army has occupied their home.  

Whatever you call them--insurgents, mostly is what they are--they remind me so much of the Hungarian and Czech people who fought Russian military force with Molotov cocktails (the IEDs of the time) and were called heroes here in the U.S.  We just let them be destroyed, though.  

[ Parent ]
I don't really think (0.00 / 0)
the Iraqi insurgency could be compared to the Czechs and Hungarians.  For starters, the Iraqi insurgency was so far from being monolithic. The Wahhabis and AQI were clearly evil guys we needed to destroy. On the other hand, the rest of the insurgency was much, much less clearly defined. While there were some tribalists/nationalists whom were probably fighting what they perceived as a foreign occupation,others of the non-Wahhabi resistance were disenfranchised Baathists whom were fighting in an effort to bring the old days back. Needless to say, the lines were real blurry. Some of the Baathists ended up in the Tribal/Nationalist resistance movements others with the Wahhabi/AQI movement. Apparently, when the Baathist funds began to dry up, certain Gulf Arab states stepped in as sources of funding, which pushed some of the Baathists/Saddamists over to the Wahhabi crowd, as the Gulf Arab donors demanded more religious fanaticism.  From there, some were in it for the money, others picked up the ideology but I wouldn't have a reasonable estimate of how many became Wahhabis and how many remained hired guns. There were also criminal gangs due to the fact that Saddam emptied the prisons before we went in, but some of them could have been Wahhabis and/or picked up by AQI. Albeit the Wahhabi/AQ crowd has also been known to set up mini Madrassas behind prison walls that are designed to indoctrinate more Wahhabis. There was also an issue with many regional nations seeing Iraq as a sort of way to get rid of their domestic Islamist types.

From there there were the Shia militias. They probably were not thrilled with a foreign presence, but it also doesn't help us a bit that we screwed them over after Gulf War I. There is also a prevailing belief amongst some Shia that we are in cuhoots with
Wahhabis to destroy Islam, as well as the general nature of Arab politics. Albeit I think there were also small Hezbollah units and a few Iranian special groups in the mix.

Needless to say, much of the nationalist/tribal insurgency stemmed from misunderstanding more than anything else. We came to understand that not everyone fighting us was an evil terrorist and they came to understand that we never wanted nor intended to make Iraq a province of the US. From there us and the Nationalists/tribalists both agreed that AQI and the Wahhabis really were an army of darkness and we fought them together. I'm still not so sure why common sense took so long to finally prevail with the Washington DC crowd on that one, but better late than never.

As far as poverty and despair go, that is one thing that the Taliban will prey on. But at the same end, AQ and the Wahhabis are regular Dark Lords of the Sith with a rather wide variety of recruiting methods designed to prey upon a wide variety of individuals. Stemming their overall recruitment will require a very multifaceted approach.

As far as the rest of Afghanistan goes, we need to kill alot more bad guys and get the Afghans into handling day to day security as quickly as possible. At the same end, I think Afghanistan could use a sort of strong man who can actually get things done and inspire Afghans to fight the Taliban. I would say Abdul Rashid Dostum, but I kind of get the feeling that the Afghans hate him. Oh well, just so long as it doesn't end up being Hekmatyar.


[ Parent ]
Of course it breaks down into factions--the Hungarians and (0.00 / 0)
Czechs did, too--one of the reasons they were so punished.  Of course not anything like what you describe--they hadn't worked as hard as dividing themselves up for as long as Sunnis and Shias, and Kurds and Iraqis . . .  very good explanation, thanks--especially as an explanation of the unexplainable!

As for Afghanistan--Dostum is a beast.  He skins people alive--this is not a rumor, I do know Afghans, former Northern Alliance people, and people living there right now, who have those stories.  He is hated for good reason, and Hekmatyar too.  Hekmatyar's shelling of Kabul was pointedly done to destroy homes and residents, to terrorize his opponents into leaving.  It worked.

The other reason they--and their thug followers--are despised is because they haven't paid even lip service to the principle that a tribal leader, even one known as a warlord, really owes his power to the support of those he leads.  It's a complicated process but when allegiances shift (a common complaint) it's done with a modicum of agreement among those led that the move benefits most of them.

Dostum and Hekmatyar are types of mercenaries, torturing and killing for power, profit, and evidently pleasure.

Either one of them would and has allied with the Taliban or anyone, anything else that serves their ends.  Not really strong, just terrorists in their way.   Nothing secure about alllying with them at all.

[ Parent ]
You just don't get it. One does not make jokes about yelling fire in (0.00 / 0)
a movie theater, bombs in an airport, or assassinating political leaders in the way Feherty did making a US soldier the person caring out the action or assigning this action to all the soldiers that he knows. Equating Pelosi and Reid to OBL is another line that should not be crossed. That is the bottom line.  Not only has Feherty crossed that line so has the D Magazine and its editor.

Feherty has admitted to having to battle both alcoholism and depression. He was also hit by a truck causing a collapsed lung. Maybe he is suffering from residual effects of anoxia or an undiagnosed TBI. Still, editors are charged with making judgment calls and the editor sorely blew it with this one.

It matters not that he is a "friend" of Tiger. What we do know is that he has been an employee of one of Tiger's businesses. Since Tiger is a Bhuddist and the son of a Vet, one can assume he would never approve of this kind of 'joke'. [In fact I just heard the NBC Golf announcers just mention that and Tiger's deep respect for our troops]

Whether Feherty has street creds as a golfer or a golf commentator has no bearing on this particular piece of junk that can not even be excused as 'grave yard humor'. Also, as person who is very familiar with the genre, grave yard humor should remain within the realm of the 'med room'---that's the private place that medical people are allowed to share such humor just as Vet's can share their particular 'humor' among themselves.

At the very least both Feherty and the D Magazine need to apologize. As a golfer of more than 50 years, linking this comment by Feherty to golf is almost as big as an insult as the use of a soldier in the joke and the reference  to 'all the soldiers I know'.

[ Parent ]
Well, deMeme...we are in complete agreement on a couple of points: (0.00 / 0)
1. "It matters not that he is a "friend of Tiger." That was a terrible mistake on my part if that is the impression I left.

2. "Whether Feherty has street creds as a golfer or a golf commentator has no bearing on this particular"...ahem...well, I agree with the first part of that sentence! And, by the way, how come medical people get to have all the fun?

I might just add that David Feherty shares Tigers deep respect for the troops...please disregard any references to golf...sorry.

[ Parent ]
John Murtha (0.00 / 0)
should have known better too. Feherty certainly put his foot in his mouth here, but Murtha really, really should have known better, especially given Murtha's background. Yet no one on here criticized Murtha on here, save for me.  
[ Parent ]
Let see an alcoholic Irishman who battles depression writes 'political (4.00 / 1)
commentary' for the D Magazine, as in Big Dollar Big Dallas.

Gotta think one of two things.
1. He's spending too much time in the members men only bar and grill at  Dallas National Golf Club, Dallas CC, or Brook Hollow.

or

2. He wants to ensure that he gets lots of invites to play as a guest on somebody else's tab at these clubs.

As to the American Legion who has W as a member...well.


Do individuals in the Service have political autonomy? (4.00 / 2)
The membership of an organization like VoteVets alone makes it pretty clear that they do. And as Jon Soltz has inferred on several occasions, they should feel free to express themselves politically as long as they do it out of uniform. The reason for that is obvious: Out of uniform, the individual is speaking for himself/herself alone; in uniform, the impression is given that the individual speaks for all others who wear the uniform. So the point is, if people who are actually serving in the Military have no right to speak for the Military as a whole, where does someone like Feherty get off doing it? And, regardless of how some people here may feel about it, since 2001 there has been a steady stream of conservative talking heads purporting to have the overwhelming support of the Military. (Those in the Military who don't agree with them are "phoney soldiers", remember?)

 

This is why news isn't journalism anymore--if (0.00 / 0)
Feherty is a sports analyst, what's he doing saying junk like that?  It's because all is entertainment on the boob tube, save for a few remaining shows with ethics.

I think you're talking about the big problem we've had all along.  So much of the watching public just sits and absorbs all the garbage that's broadcast at them.  To evaluate Feherty, all one would have to think is, "What the hell does he know about the American military?"  But what he said is just a repetition of what you pointed out, that

since 2001 there has been a steady stream of conservative talking heads purporting to have the overwhelming support of the Military. (Those in the Military who don't agree with them are "phoney soldiers", remember?)

That's been absorbed for a number of years, and now passes for informed opinion for many Americans.

[ Parent ]
What if Feherty had said 'any American' in place of 'US soldier'? (0.00 / 0)
I would just make two points...first, from what I have read about this, here and elsewhere, it is clear that most people commenting haven't got the foggiest idea of who David Feherty is. I would suspect that if more of those people commenting on this issue knew a little bit about the man - and I mean just from regularly watching the PGA on TV - then there would be little attention, if any, paid to a column that exudes hyperbole he wrote a couple of months ago!

And, you said Feherty's point "was that every American soldier thinks that war is just the greatest thing he ever experienced and  harbors antipathy for Pelosi and Reid's lack of hoo-rah for it."

I'm sorry, but that is about as over the top as one could ever hope to get! Could his point not have been that the soldiers he has heard from don't exactly have a very high opinion of Reid and Pelosi? And, isn't that an opinion shared by any number of Americans, including among Democrats!? I share it!

It never ceases to amaze me how so many people can think they know so much about a person when they actually know so little. I mean, I'm a Biden fan, for God's sake! Feherty has been called a 'conservative talking head' and a whole lot worse - based just on one obviously tongue-firmly-planted-in-cheek article, steeped in hyperbole, about what it's going to be like to have former President Bush for a neighbor. It is obvious that these people have no clue as to who David Feherty is - not one iota!

[ Parent ]
Well (0.00 / 0)
Pelosi never served a day in any branch of the Armed Forces and supported US military involvement in the Balkans, involvement which really didn't end up having anything to do with our National Security.  Doesn't that make her a chickenhawk too?
[ Parent ]
What are you trying to say to me, Fred? (0.00 / 0)
Far be it for me to go around calling anybody a chickenhawk - it's just not my place.

But, did you see this yet...
http://www.postandcourier.com/...

[ Parent ]
I see your point. (0.00 / 0)
It probably isn't anyone's place who hasn't actually served to throw out the term chicken hawk. But at the same end, Pelosi is anything but a principled pacifist. Now what I probably should have asked is, "Who would you rather see fired? Feherty or Pelosi?"
[ Parent ]
That's a no-brainer!!! (0.00 / 0)
Are you a Feherty fan? Let me just say this... If he gets fired by CBS, then I will have yet another reason to call the media inept and incompetent.

As for Pelosi, I don't give her much thought.

[ Parent ]
I wouldn't say (0.00 / 0)
I am a huge fan of Feherty, but I certainly think he is getting a raw deal here. He had a brain fart, told a tasteless joke, and all of a sudden everyone seems to think he is some sort of "Chickenhawk, right-wing, Christianist." I mean, I didn't see anyone on here calling for Keith Olbermann to be fired for his disrespect of Allen West, who happens to be a combat veteran.  

[ Parent ]
Besides, (0.00 / 0)
It was none other than Senator Biden who, to paraphrase my favourite politician, beat President Clinton upside the head in an effort to convince him to lead NATO into intervening in the Balkans to stop a genocide. I sure do hope you don't consider him a chickenhawk or we may have a serious debate on our hands! :0

That may have had little to do with US national security - but, I believe it was the right thing to do.

[ Parent ]
Biden (0.00 / 0)
also supported taking Saddam Hussein down, which Pelosi didn't. We can question his judgement on both counts all day, but at least he didn't show a lack of principle.    
[ Parent ]
Well, (0.00 / 0)
...and I hope Richard isn't looking because I'm about to go off topic!...

Biden did not "vote for war" when he voted for the resolution authorizing US military force in Iraq. He has explained that if he were President at the time, he would also have wanted congressional support in the form of an authorization resolution (to coerce the UN into making sure weapon inspectors stayed on the ground in Iraq and into keeping sanctions in place ) but that he would have used that authorization to AVOID war and certainly not rush into it!

I appreciate very much - more than you can know - that you don't think that Biden showed a lack of principle. Sometimes, it can seem to a Biden supporter that few understand what motivates him. :(

[ Parent ]
I certainly (0.00 / 0)
think Biden did want Saddam taken down one way or another. He probably didn't want Iraq to turn out like it did, but I don't even think Paul Bremer and Donald Rumsfeld woke up one morning on a mission intending to destroy Iraq. Needless to say, I have had many disagreements with Biden, but I can't say everyone I disagree with stinks now, can I. Pelosi on the other hand, she pretty much is worthless.  
[ Parent ]
Elizabeth, (0.00 / 0)
if Feherty were just a neighbor and said something like this, that would be one thing. But that's not what Feherty is -- he's a broadcaster with access to thousands of people. He may be the nicest guy on the planet, but it doesn't make what he said any less irresponsible.  
[ Parent ]
Sorry, Gage (0.00 / 0)
but I think too many people who seem to know nothing about David Feherty - including what he has been doing in support of the troops! - seem somehow to think they know enough to call him everything under the sun based solely on minute portions of some humor-laden article he wrote some time ago without even acknowledging, much less understanding the motivation behind the writing.

I find that to be very irresponsible.

I've seen enough of this kind of immature behavior surrounding Vice President Biden to last a veritable lifetime - and, frankly, I'm sick and tired of it all.

[ Parent ]
Elizabeth, (0.00 / 0)
okay I want to understand. Tell me what motivated him.
[ Parent ]
The motivation behind the article (0.00 / 0)
was to take a funny look at how people would receive the former President as their new neighbour. It was meant as a tongue-in-cheek piece and anyone who is the least bit familiar with Feherty knows that his sense of humour can be dry, dark and very self-deprecating.

Of course, not everyone shares the same kind of sense of humor...and, on top of that, we have become altogether too sensitive about stuff like this, if you ask me...and, I can be as guilty of that as anyone, given the opportunity!

[ Parent ]
Elizabeth, (0.00 / 0)
you're probably right that we've become too sensitive. As long as I'm being too sensitive I'd like to add something else I don't like about Feherty's statement. I wish he'd not put Osama bin Laden in that elevator because, to me, it trivializes the sad history of this war that began in 2001 supposedly as a "hunt for bin Laden." I'm still pissed off about what happened after that.
[ Parent ]
I'm even more pissed off about what (0.00 / 0)
happened before that(2001) in regards to UBL.  
[ Parent ]
Well, there certainly is no shortage of things to be angry about (0.00 / 0)
in regards to the long history of our relations with UBL and his homeland.
[ Parent ]
If I weren't pissed off about what bin Laden did (0.00 / 0)
before 2001, I guess I wouldn't be pissed off about what happened to the "hunt for bin Laden" then. That's the point.
[ Parent ]
I understand the concern about context--that (0.00 / 0)
Feherty was doing a running commentary or something?  But he wasn't in a closed room, talking to people that know him, are used to him, etc.  He was speaking internationally, and that carries a responsibility.  

I rarely watch commercial TV, and never watch golf coverage.  Yet I know what he said--and people hearing what he said without knowing much about him personally, or his usual way of communicating, is much more likely, internatiionally, than having the kind of familiarity that Elizabeth and others have with his work.

CBS Sports Analyst Buys into "Crazy Vets" Meme, Insults our Professionalism and Mental Capacity | 75 comments
VetVoice on Social Media
Follow rockrichard on Twitter

VoteVets.org on Facebook
    		•
    VetVoice Recommends

    "The War I Always Wanted,"
    By Brandon Friedman

    "The welcome mat for memoirs by veterans of operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom might never wear out so long as they write with the savvy of Brandon Friedman . . . Friedman's take is vivid, frank, precise and dramatic." --Military Times

    "Add Brandon Friedman's The War I Always Wanted to the ranks of outstanding non-fiction produced by officers from elite combat units in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Always truthful, often excruciatingly so, The War I Always Wanted rises at numerous points to the level of literature." --Steven Pressfield, author of Gates of Fire

    Buy The War I Always Wanted here.

    "A Time To Lead,"
    By General (Ret.) Wesley K. Clark

    "A Time To Lead confirms the rewarding benefits of military service at a time when such service is experiencing considerable strain. It also includes a comprehensive description of America's current national imperatives, which deserve serious consideration." --General Alexander M. Haig, Jr., former Secretary of State

    "This is a primer on leadership forged in battle and by decades of experience. . .This isn't just a book; it's a manual for leading people and living a good life." --Barry McCaffrey, General, USA (ret.)

    Buy A Time to Lead here.

    "Love My Rifle More Than You,"
    By Kayla Williams

    "Whip smart, sassy, with a mouth as foul as a sailor's, 28-year-old Sergeant Kayla Williams. . .tells what it's like to be a female soldier in Iraq." --Booklist

    ". . .echoes military memoirists from Julius Caesar to Ernie Pyle." --Publishers Weekly

    ". . .a shocking, on-the-ground view of one military woman's experience in Iraq." --Bookmarks Magazine

    Buy Love My Rifle More Than You here.

    "How to Break a Terrorist,"
    By Matthew Alexander

    "...a riveting, fast-paced account that reads like a first-rate thriller." --Publisher's Weekly

    " ...an absorbing behind-the-scenes look at the secret intelligence war within a war." --Military.com

    Buy How to Break a Terrorist here.
    Search

    Advanced Search
    RSS Feed Links

    Subscribe to VetVoice in a feed reader!

    Subscribe to VetVoice by Email!
    Diaries and comments at VetVoice do not necessarily represent the views of VoteVets.org. VetVoice will strive to remove any illegal material as soon as it is flagged. Similarly, VetVoice will use its discretion in determining whether to remove exceedingly offensive material. However, between posting and removal, any offensive or illegal material does not reflect the condoning or endorsing of said material by VoteVets.org or VetVoice.
    Similarly, the views expressed on this website are those of the authors alone. Opinions on this website do not necessarily represent the views of the Department of Defense or any of its components.
    Menu

    Make a New Account

    Username:

    Password:


    Forget your username or password?

    Front Page Writers
    PTSD Resources
    TBI Resources
    IRR Information
    Casualty Reports
    VA Information
    Support the Troops
    Veteran Candidates We Support
    Congressional Committees
    Contact Your Elected Leaders
    Sites We Like

    Paid for VoteVets Political Action Committee. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. VoteVets Action Fund is a 501(c)(4) organization which primarily focuses on nonpartisan education and advocacy on behalf veterans and their families. VoteVets Political Action Committee is a federal political committee which primarily helps elect Iraq and Afghanistan war veteran candidates and educates about veterans and military issues aimed at influencing the outcome of the next election.

    Site Design: Articulated Man

    VoteVets Political Action and Vote Vets Action Fund are separate organizations.

    Powered by: SoapBlox