muddysmind.com

He's very lucky. Flak jackets are not intended to stop a rifle round, so he either had the extra inserts (they have titanium - i think it is titanium - inserts for extra protection, though few people have them), was shot by a pistol, or was just damned lucky.

wow, im glad there is Finally some "good news" out of iraq. this is the best story ive heard in over 2 years of this conquest. oddly enough you say hes one of the "few people" with body armor. why dont you go post that on that blog talking about how the "Slanted reported" payed the soldier to ask about body armor. i would like to see the response they give you.

its a shame were losing a war we didnt have too. then again we didnt have to go into iraq in the first place.

Uh, the war was won in case you missed it.
All we're doing now is helping to keep the peace while they train up their police and military.

I didn't say he was one of the few with body armor, i said he's one of the few with the inserts. I've heard more than my fair share of good news out of Iraq. In fact, most of the soldiers and Marines there said the media is their worst enemy there.

the media is their worst enemy? i guess some people are liable to belive anything. i would have thought IEDs were their worst enemy myself.

we defeated a crippled iraqi army with low morale, however were losing the insurgency. all were doing is building at least 12 permanent bases in iraq. you know bush is pretty clever. during his little pep ralley for iraq last month he said were only staying until the 'iraqis are ready.' Thats great, the only problem is we decide when theyre ready.

reminds me of little plan Nixon had called Vietnamization.

IEDs are a relatively rare thing. Scary? Yes. Rare? Yes.

I would not define us as losing anything right now, and btw, the parallel to Vietnam is completely unrealistic. The 2 have little to nothing in common.

dude, are you sure you dont work for the administration of propoganda? IEDs are Anything but "rare" in iraq. theyre even becoming a more common tactic in afghanistan according to news reports. how old are you and what is your MOS btw?

theres a guy in my clan thats in the army, and he said there are 290 IEDs that go off a week in iraq. this was information that was given in a video he watched made by the army. he talked about how Large the IEDs are now becoming.

i dont know how in any way you can say 290 improvised explosion devices a week is "rare", and im not sure if that even takes into account all the Suicide car bombs.

there is a very compelling book thats called "How America Lost Iraq".
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1585424269/qid=1120910268/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_ur_1/104-0590245-6943936?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

the author did an extensive radio interview and made a very compelling case of everything that is Wrong in iraq, and how we "lost" the war. despite the provacitive title, he basically states the US "lost" the iraqi people from the lack of rebuilding the infrastructure, all the attacks from terrorist and insurgents, lack of law, plus the large numbers of "collateral damage" weve inflicted has turned many moderate iraqis into america haters that tacitly support or even participate in terrorist/insurgent activities.

you live near atlanta, you know what 100 degrees is like. how would you feel if you had power only 8 hours a day with 100+ degree weather? how would you feel if you couldnt leave the house because if a suicide bomber didnt kill you, you may be detained by american forces or killed.

the general lack of planning and lack of control the US has in iraq, is how weve "lost" the war. when your fighting an insurgency, the "hearts and minds" of the majority of people is what you need to win. its hard to win people over when they shoot your cousin, arrest your uncle, ration out 8 hours of electricity in 130 degree weather with no running water and you have no job.

now that is just the reality of baghdad and much of iraq, not even taking into the nationalist feelings people have about being invaded by a foriegn country and the Patriotism they feel be a "freedom fighter."

hey muddy, i just heard good news for you. apprently since bush cant get enough people to join the army, hes raising the enlistment age to 42. now youll have plenty of time to serve in iraq.

i think i finally found something to praise bush for. he should raise the enlistment age to 70 so all of his buddies like dick cheney and limbaugh who Supported the vietnam war, yet managed to make excuses not to go... can now serve their country in iraq.

"he should raise the enlistment age to 70..."

Yeah, then maybe Clinton could make up for dodging the draft during the Vietnam war and go fight the war in Iraq.

the difference is, clinton didnt support the vietnam war. bush, limbaugh and cheney are all on record for supporting vietnam. several weeks ago bush had the president of vietnam at the whitehouse. on a radio show i was listening too, someone joked this was the closest bush ever came to vietnam.

i have no problem with sending clinton to iraq. he supported the war, so send him and All the people over there who supported it.

i find it intresting that 50 million people voted for bush, yet he cant get 10K or 15K people a month to join the army or marines? where are all these people? your telling me out of the MILLIONs who voted for this man, theyre not willing to send themselves, their friends, their children, of the friends of their children to get killed in iraq?

i was under the impression that the people who voted for bush had given him a "vote of confidence" and "faith" was a large part of the reason they voted for him.i guess they dont have enough faith in the war in iraq to send any of they know.

"the difference is, clinton didnt support the vietnam war"

So, he runs away. If you don't support a war, you don't run away. You stick around and "fix" whatever problems you have from "the inside" (so to speak). In that situation (as with the war in Iraq) you don't gain respect by running away like a little boy from whatever duty is expected of you. You stay and face it like a man. Of course, Clinton always did have problems with being a true man so I would never expect him to understand what is expected of one to begin with.

"i find it intresting that 50 million people voted for bush, yet he cant get 10K or 15K people a month to join the army or marines?'

Actually, according to an article I read that was dated on the 11th of this month,
"all three components of the Army are ahead on their efforts to retain current soldiers"

and....
"The active Navy, Air Force and Marines made their monthly goals"
"The Air National Guard, Air Force Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve made their June goals"

You can find that article here:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-07-11-military-recruits_x.htm

"theyre not willing to send themselves, their friends, their children, of the friends of their children to get killed in iraq?"

Well, not everyone is of the age where they *can* be recruited/joint. My husband is past the age and neither of my kids are old enough. Besides, even if my kids *were* of age, I wouldn't *send* them because I don't have that authority nor would I make that decision for them. If they were to voulunteer for service sometime in the future - yes, I would worry and be concerned just like any normal parent would BUT I would also be extremely proud of them for giving their time and themselves to defending this great nation.

wait, you tell me about all the recuiting goals being made, and the Headline of the article is, "National Guard misses recruiting goal again".

"The regular Army has recruited 47,121 soldiers, or 86% of its goal of 54,935 for this point in the year. It is trying to reach 80,000 by the end of September. Officials are becoming less hopeful they will make it, even though the summer is considered the high season for recruiting, as recent high school graduates look for jobs."

how is your husband "past the age" to serve? i thought he was 33, now i may be wrong with that info, but 33 is well within the limit of 42 to join. thats plenty of time. i dont have a problem with people "serving" their country, hell i almost joined the army a few years ago. i just ponder as to why is it so difficult to get a few thousand people to enlist and go to iraq, out of the millions that voted for bush.

he cant get more than 16 thousandths of 1% percent of his voters to serve their country, not even 80,000 people are willing to join the army this year? thats .0016% out of 50 million. i thought Republicans were "patriotic" and supported the millitary. i thought all democrats were evil anti military communist, but where is the support of those voters when they need boots in iraq?

i just wonder where of all those people are.

muddy wouldn't pass a military physical on so many grounds. Not to mention that I doubt he could run a mile without collapsing.

Skywalker:

That's cold man. True. But cold. However, I wouldn't say he would flunk the physical on *so* many grounds. There would be quite a few perhapes but not many.:-)

Actually, I, myself, wouldn't make it through basic training (nor would I probably pass a physical) but I think I would have a better chance at making it through basic than muddy would. And *I* would be a laughing stock.

Mooseboy:

"wait, you tell me about all the recuiting goals being made, and the Headline of the article is, "National Guard misses recruiting goal again"."

Yes, but my point was what was *in* the article not what the *title* was. Besides, don't you know by now that the number one goal for the majority of newspapers in this country is to sell more papers first then secondly to tell their view of the truth? So obviously, the title wouldn't include anything positive about the article but at least this *did* try to give the whole story - which was *my* point to begin with.

"but 33 is well within the limit of 42 to join."

I didn't realize that the proposed new age limit had been passed already. I thought it was still an idea in the development stages of thought and planing. Maybe I'm wrong? Besides, I believe (or at least I thought) that most branches had an age cut off of late 20's and very early 30's (like 32...though some may be 35....I truely don't know).

In any case....just see Skywalker's statement.:-) Trust me. If Muddy could (physically), I'm sure he would join.

mrs.m: you're 4F.

Actually, they don't have to raise any limit. All he has to do is direct them to wave the age restriction which is normaly 29 unless you've previously service in the military or civil service.

"mrs.m: you're 4F."

LOL! You know....I just had to look that up because I had no idea what that even ment.
No kidding I'm 4F (which is why I'd be a laughing stock)....but Uh - thanks for the vote of confidence there babe.:-D

JK:-) Actually, I am most likely medically 4F (is that what that specifically means?)