Saturday, May 07, 2005
Doonesbury is no Comic
Okay, I'll bite.
Has Garry Trudeau even read a military web log? I'm only one, and I haven't read all the others, but I have seen quite a few. They are all very different, but not one of them reads like the one Trudeau dreamed up for his Doonesbury cutouts.
Does he have any idea what the military is like? Does he know anyone in the military? I'd be very surprised if his "research" for this latest series went farther than the Daily Kos or Democratic Underground.
Hillbilly armor humvees. Please, can somebody dream up any new strawmen for Garry? We're National Guard, and half of our vehicles were up-armored with factory grade steel before they left Kuwait; the rest were line hauled. Since we've been here, we use the light skin for around the FOB, but even those, as many as we want can get up-armored. We just won't bother with some of them as they will be shipped back home, and other than for convoys the up-armored are difficult, costly to maintain, and more prone to accident. (Everything is a trade-off my friend, even body armor presents risk as well as protection.)
And other supply and equipment? My word, we waste more than armies usually have. Our soldiers have been the best equipped, trained, supported, and supplied soldiers in history. Our guys are complaining about a lot of things, as they always will, but they aren't complaining about their Rapid Fielding Initiative (RFI) goodies or their advanced weapons and equipment. And we're National Guard.
I am sure Garry thinks he's very clever, but it should occur to him that to properly satirize, lampoon, or profile critically in caricature, your result needs to remotely resemble what you lampoon. And it wouldn't hurt for you to have some positive goal in mind, either. Trudeau fails on both counts.
I remember enjoying Doonesbury a very long time ago. But then, I didn't used to have much respect for the military either, until I devoted 20 years and 18 months away from my wife and children in service to our country.
It really is sad that Trudeau can't find any true and realistic stories of soldiers that he wants to tell. But that's okay, because MILBLOGS will do it for him.
UPDATE:
John Schroeder of Blogotional and Mustang 23 of Assumption of Command both offer gracious and well-appreciated support for our beef with Doonesbury.
Thanks John, and thanks Mustang 23. I have very much appreciated your support and encouragement. You both do fine work, and I couldn't ask for a higher class of readers. Which of course is true of all of you, and if you don't know John and Mustang 23, check them out. :)
Has Garry Trudeau even read a military web log? I'm only one, and I haven't read all the others, but I have seen quite a few. They are all very different, but not one of them reads like the one Trudeau dreamed up for his Doonesbury cutouts.
Does he have any idea what the military is like? Does he know anyone in the military? I'd be very surprised if his "research" for this latest series went farther than the Daily Kos or Democratic Underground.
Hillbilly armor humvees. Please, can somebody dream up any new strawmen for Garry? We're National Guard, and half of our vehicles were up-armored with factory grade steel before they left Kuwait; the rest were line hauled. Since we've been here, we use the light skin for around the FOB, but even those, as many as we want can get up-armored. We just won't bother with some of them as they will be shipped back home, and other than for convoys the up-armored are difficult, costly to maintain, and more prone to accident. (Everything is a trade-off my friend, even body armor presents risk as well as protection.)
And other supply and equipment? My word, we waste more than armies usually have. Our soldiers have been the best equipped, trained, supported, and supplied soldiers in history. Our guys are complaining about a lot of things, as they always will, but they aren't complaining about their Rapid Fielding Initiative (RFI) goodies or their advanced weapons and equipment. And we're National Guard.
I am sure Garry thinks he's very clever, but it should occur to him that to properly satirize, lampoon, or profile critically in caricature, your result needs to remotely resemble what you lampoon. And it wouldn't hurt for you to have some positive goal in mind, either. Trudeau fails on both counts.
I remember enjoying Doonesbury a very long time ago. But then, I didn't used to have much respect for the military either, until I devoted 20 years and 18 months away from my wife and children in service to our country.
It really is sad that Trudeau can't find any true and realistic stories of soldiers that he wants to tell. But that's okay, because MILBLOGS will do it for him.
UPDATE:
John Schroeder of Blogotional and Mustang 23 of Assumption of Command both offer gracious and well-appreciated support for our beef with Doonesbury.
Thanks John, and thanks Mustang 23. I have very much appreciated your support and encouragement. You both do fine work, and I couldn't ask for a higher class of readers. Which of course is true of all of you, and if you don't know John and Mustang 23, check them out. :)
Comments:
Links to this post:
<< Home
Good post. I've been reading Trudeau's strip lately and had pretty much the same reaction. Forget about it--he's just another mindless liberal with a large mouth and a frozen brain.
Speaking of the downside of body armor, I spent a lot of time wearing a heavy, thick kevlar chest protector, and the only thing it ever did for me was split my chin open during a helicopter crash. Still got the scar.
Speaking of the downside of body armor, I spent a lot of time wearing a heavy, thick kevlar chest protector, and the only thing it ever did for me was split my chin open during a helicopter crash. Still got the scar.
I posted this on the website The Command T.O.C.
When you read Dadmanly's MILBLOG concerning the military equipment we learn that:
'There are no Armor Humvee problems and we, as a military, waste more supplies than most Armies have" [paraphase quote]
Sounds like we should use that as the reason to CUT the military budget. Doesn't sound like they need anything and if they were put on a strict financial diet maybe they would stop wasting the taxpayer's money. This is from a staunch military person with over 20 years experience. Sounds authoritative to me.
When you read Dadmanly's MILBLOG concerning the military equipment we learn that:
'There are no Armor Humvee problems and we, as a military, waste more supplies than most Armies have" [paraphase quote]
Sounds like we should use that as the reason to CUT the military budget. Doesn't sound like they need anything and if they were put on a strict financial diet maybe they would stop wasting the taxpayer's money. This is from a staunch military person with over 20 years experience. Sounds authoritative to me.
Brilliant idea, let's take away money from the military during a war. That's a sure fire way to ensure victory........... Forgive me while I roll my eyes.
And this is coming from me, a guy that is going back to Iraq for his third trip. Going to kirkuk this time in July.
And this is coming from me, a guy that is going back to Iraq for his third trip. Going to kirkuk this time in July.
Kevin,
Nice try. You quote out of context, and you extend my remarks to state that I hold an opinion I do not have.
Make your own argument to cut the military if you will, please don't use me to support your thesis.
My point was, liberal anti-war commentators can find other strawmen to poke their lances at -- the military being under-supported or under equipped is both disingenuous, and patently false. The irony of the bait and switch of such arguments is rich; almost as ill-intended as Democrats trying to bring back the draft. They keep trying to find a "horse pill" solution big enough to choke the horse.
Nice try. You quote out of context, and you extend my remarks to state that I hold an opinion I do not have.
Make your own argument to cut the military if you will, please don't use me to support your thesis.
My point was, liberal anti-war commentators can find other strawmen to poke their lances at -- the military being under-supported or under equipped is both disingenuous, and patently false. The irony of the bait and switch of such arguments is rich; almost as ill-intended as Democrats trying to bring back the draft. They keep trying to find a "horse pill" solution big enough to choke the horse.
Dadmanly:
Then I missed something. Please help me to understand. We just appropriated another $80bl to the military effort. Last fall/winter we did a special appropriations because there was a "major crisis" in the up armoring of the Humvees. That was the military who said that after being called out by a soldier.
You say, and I quote, "We waste more than armies usually have". Why is that not an argument to cut funding? If you were to say that to the CEO of any business they would, one, wonder why you are wasting so much, then two, thank you for giving back a portion of your budget. Why is that not so in the military?
While I admit I am against this war, this commentary has more to do with the huge deficit spending that we are doing which, by the way, does more to make us less safe than the war in Iraq. Given what you are saying, how could I draw any conclusion other than the military is overfunded?
Then I missed something. Please help me to understand. We just appropriated another $80bl to the military effort. Last fall/winter we did a special appropriations because there was a "major crisis" in the up armoring of the Humvees. That was the military who said that after being called out by a soldier.
You say, and I quote, "We waste more than armies usually have". Why is that not an argument to cut funding? If you were to say that to the CEO of any business they would, one, wonder why you are wasting so much, then two, thank you for giving back a portion of your budget. Why is that not so in the military?
While I admit I am against this war, this commentary has more to do with the huge deficit spending that we are doing which, by the way, does more to make us less safe than the war in Iraq. Given what you are saying, how could I draw any conclusion other than the military is overfunded?
Nice try. You quote out of context, and you extend my remarks to state that I hold an opinion I do not have.
*gasp* Someone on the left quoting people out of context?! Shocking... or it would be if it didn't occur so often. Though the smarter ones try to use it so one has to search through transcripts or archives to catch the out-of-context quoting, as opposed to oh, making it on the same page so one can go back and think "gosh, that is so not what the other guy was saying".
*gasp* Someone on the left quoting people out of context?! Shocking... or it would be if it didn't occur so often. Though the smarter ones try to use it so one has to search through transcripts or archives to catch the out-of-context quoting, as opposed to oh, making it on the same page so one can go back and think "gosh, that is so not what the other guy was saying".
# posted by 
: 12:46 AM
: 12:46 AM
Kevin,
As I said, the arguments for or against or about the level of defense spending are what they are, have at it. As a taxpayer I hope we see progress in making expenditures more efficient. (But it's been a long wait thus far.)
Yes there's a lot of waste -- I may have used excessive hyperbole, but we can admit it happens! -- but as far as Humvees are concerned, think of it this way.
Before the added expenditure: not enough armor, not enough units or vehicles protected, soldiers speak out as say, "More!". After expenditure: sufficient armor, job got done, soldiers speak out and say, "got the job done."
Think of it as a before and after picture. We're grateful the effrort was expended and we've got the best protection our money can buy.
As I said, the arguments for or against or about the level of defense spending are what they are, have at it. As a taxpayer I hope we see progress in making expenditures more efficient. (But it's been a long wait thus far.)
Yes there's a lot of waste -- I may have used excessive hyperbole, but we can admit it happens! -- but as far as Humvees are concerned, think of it this way.
Before the added expenditure: not enough armor, not enough units or vehicles protected, soldiers speak out as say, "More!". After expenditure: sufficient armor, job got done, soldiers speak out and say, "got the job done."
Think of it as a before and after picture. We're grateful the effrort was expended and we've got the best protection our money can buy.
Kevin,
All armies waste. The more money spent on an Army, the more that gets wasted. It's the same in business. But you know that. You've got an MBA, right? Just because IBM wastes more than, say, eMachines, doesn't necessarily mean they need to downsize.
I'd have more respect for you if you'd talk about specific things the Army could cut. For instance, you could take a look at the Sayen Report and get some good ideas on the organization side. Or you could look at Everest Riccioni's report on the F-22. Instead you're trolling around blogs like this, quoting shit out of context.
So. Think of me as your Daddy. Earn my approval by doing some homework:
http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/comments/c372.htm
All armies waste. The more money spent on an Army, the more that gets wasted. It's the same in business. But you know that. You've got an MBA, right? Just because IBM wastes more than, say, eMachines, doesn't necessarily mean they need to downsize.
I'd have more respect for you if you'd talk about specific things the Army could cut. For instance, you could take a look at the Sayen Report and get some good ideas on the organization side. Or you could look at Everest Riccioni's report on the F-22. Instead you're trolling around blogs like this, quoting shit out of context.
So. Think of me as your Daddy. Earn my approval by doing some homework:
http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/comments/c372.htm
"Earn my approval by doing some homework"....ROFLMAO GOOD ONE FRED!
Nuff said!
As far as Gary is concerned...he is such an elitist and so out of touch with reality because rarely comes down and out of the ivory tower he lives in to walk amongst the hoary masses. He is part of the closed loop democrats that appeal only to like minded elitists and yet convince themselves that their reach is much farther.
In Trudeau's case, he hasn't written anything funny, witty, or relevant in well over 10 yrs!
Fade away, Trudeau's fade far away!
Doonesbury should be changed to Duncebury!
Nuff said!
As far as Gary is concerned...he is such an elitist and so out of touch with reality because rarely comes down and out of the ivory tower he lives in to walk amongst the hoary masses. He is part of the closed loop democrats that appeal only to like minded elitists and yet convince themselves that their reach is much farther.
In Trudeau's case, he hasn't written anything funny, witty, or relevant in well over 10 yrs!
Fade away, Trudeau's fade far away!
Doonesbury should be changed to Duncebury!
Dadmanly - that's what those on the left do, parse and take out of context or call names. Not that TOC calls names so I give him credit for that point. Doonesbury is irrelevent and has been for decades. I don't understand how anyone could be surprised by his strip, this is what he does and has been doing forever. It's just that now his audience is dying away so he's trying to pick up readers but they aren't buying. He's a has-been.
Hey Dad,
Good come back. I stopped getting the funnies when they took B.C. out of their columns. The whole rag is a WASTE of PAPER that the have to CUT down TREES to make. My God, think of the environment! Hehehe.
Kevin who? Not worth the time.
Good come back. I stopped getting the funnies when they took B.C. out of their columns. The whole rag is a WASTE of PAPER that the have to CUT down TREES to make. My God, think of the environment! Hehehe.
Kevin who? Not worth the time.
It sickens me that Dadmanly and Mustang have to defend themselves against this kind of stuff. They have people with IED's and AK47's to worry about. They should not have to worry about shots coming from back home. Just a few of my comments as I have linked here
I agree; doonesbury DOES suck. The strip on this past sunday was about my home state. It states that they are requiring people to BUY an ID card to vote; however the state has buses set up to GIVE ID cards out. We are trying to stop voter fraud and the LIBERALS are bitching...go figure.
Post a Comment
# posted by : 8:51 AM
: 8:51 AM Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
Links to this post:
<< Home
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
