Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Israel to U.S. : Now Deal with Syria and Iran -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Emile Vidrine who wrote (3747)	11/14/2003 11:36:07 AM
From: Scoobah	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22250

AN HONOR TO OUR COUNTRY What do these three gentlemen have in common??? Quite a few of us grew up with Captain Kangaroo, as you or your children probably did. I knew nothing of his background, only that his show was both entertaining, educational, and as kids, we looked forward to it with great anticipation. Captain Kangaroo turned 76 in 2002 (DOB: 6/27/27), which is odd, because he's never looked a day under 76. It reminded me of the following story. Hope you enjoy it as much as I did.Some people have been a bit offended that Lee Marvin is buried in a grave alongside 3 and 4-star generals at Arlington National Cemetery. His marker gives his name, rank and service (USMC). Nothing else. Here's a guy who was only a famous movie star who served his time, why the heck does he rate burial with these guys? Well, following is the amazing answer: I always liked Lee Marvin, but did not know the extent of his Corps experience. In a time when many Hollywood stars served their country in the armed forces, often in rear-echelon posts where they were carefully protected, only to be trotted out to perform for the cameras in war bond promotions, Lee Marvin was a genuine hero. He won the Navy Cross at Iwo Jima. There is only one higher Naval award...the Medal Of Honor. If that is a surprising comment on the true character of the man, he also credits his sergeant with an even greater show of bravery. While a guest on The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson, Johnny Carson said, "Lee, I'll bet a lot of people are unaware that you were a Marine in the initial landing at Iwo Jima ... and that during the of that action you earned the Navy Cross and were severely wounded." "Yeah, yeah ... I got shot square in the butt and they gave me the Cross for securing a hot spot about halfway up Suribachi ... bad thing about getting shot up on a mountain is guys gettin' shot hauling you down. But Johnny, at Iwo I served under the bravest man I ever knew ... We both got the Cross the same day, but what he did for his Cross made mine look cheap in comparison. The dumb guy actually stood up on Red Beach and directed his troops to move forward and get the hell off the beach. That Sergeant and I have been lifelong friends. When they brought me off Suribachi we passed the Sergeant and he lit a smoke and passed it to me lying on my belly on the litter and said, 'Where'd they get you Lee?' Well, Bob ... if you make it home before me, tell Mom to sell the outhouse! Johnny, I'm not lying..Sergeant Keeshan was the bravest man I ever knew... Bob Keeshan.. You and the world know him as Captain Kangaroo." On another note, there was this wimpy little man (who just passed away) on PBS, gentle and quite Mr. Rogers is another one of those you would least suspect of being anything but what he now portrays to our youth. But Mr. Rogers was a US Navy Seal, combat proven in Vietnam with over twenty-five confirmed kills to his name. He wore a long sleeve sweater to cover the many tattoos on his forearm and biceps. A master in small arms and hand-to-hand combat, he was able to disarm or kill in a heartbeat. He hid that away and won our hearts with his quiet wit and charm. America's real heroes don't flaunt what they did, they quietly go about their day to day lives, doing what they do best. They earned our respect and the freedom's that we all enjoy. Amazing what we do not know about people.

To: Emile Vidrine who wrote (3747)	11/15/2003 3:46:32 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Respond to of 22250

Re: Most recently, I heard a [Judeo]con columnist refer to the democratization of the region as "draining the swamp." It is a chilling expression, because it evokes some of the horrendous euphemisms employed by the gas-chamber fascism of 60 years ago. Well, I'm afraid you don't have to sift that far back into your history books --you can stop in 1957, in the thick of the Battle of Algiers: Published on Sunday, September 7, 2003 by the New York Times What Does the Pentagon See in 'Battle of Algiers'? by Michael Kaufman Challenged by terrorist tactics and guerrilla warfare in Iraq, the Pentagon recently held a screening of "The Battle of Algiers," the film that in the late 1960's was required viewing and something of a teaching tool for radicalized Americans and revolutionary wannabes opposing the Vietnam War. Back in those days the young audiences that often sat through several showings of Gillo Pontecorvo's 1965 re-enactment of the urban struggle between French troops and Algerian nationalists, shared the director's sympathies for the guerrillas of the F.L.N., Algeria's National Liberation Front. Those viewers identified with and even cheered for Ali La Pointe, the streetwise operator who drew on his underworld connections to organize a network of terrorist cells and entrenched it within the Casbah, the city's old Muslim section. In the same way they would hiss Colonel Mathieu, the character based on Jacques Massu, the actual commander of the French forces. The Pentagon's showing drew a more professionally detached audience of about 40 officers and civilian experts who were urged to consider and discuss the implicit issues at the core of the film — the problematic but alluring efficacy of brutal and repressive means in fighting clandestine terrorists in places like Algeria and Iraq. Or more specifically, the advantages and costs of resorting to torture and intimidation in seeking vital human intelligence about enemy plans. As the flier inviting guests to the Pentagon screening declared: "How to win a battle against terrorism and lose the war of ideas. Children shoot soldiers at point-blank range. Women plant bombs in cafes. Soon the entire Arab population builds to a mad fervor. Sound familiar? The French have a plan. It succeeds tactically, but fails strategically. To understand why, come to a rare showing of this film." The idea came from the Directorate for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict, which a Defense Department official described as a civilian-led group with "responsibility for thinking aggressively and creatively" on issues of guerrilla war. The official said, "Showing the film offers historical insight into the conduct of French operations in Algeria, and was intended to prompt informative discussion of the challenges faced by the French." He added that the discussion was lively and that more showings would probably be held. No details of the discussion were provided but if the talk was confined to the action of the film it would have focused only on the battle for the city, which ended in 1957 in apparent triumph for the French with the killing of La Pointe and the destruction of the network. But insurrection continued throughout Algeria, and though the French won the Battle of Algiers, they lost the war for Algeria, ultimately withdrawing from a newly independent country ruled by the F.L.N. in 1962. During the last four decades the events re-enacted in the film and the wider war in Algeria have been cited as an effective use of the tactics of a "people's war," where fighters emerge from seemingly ordinary lives to mount attacks and then retreat to the cover of their everyday identities. The question of how conventional armies can contend with such tactics and subdue their enemies seems as pressing today in Iraq as it did in Algiers in 1957. In both instances the need for on-the-ground intelligence is required to learn of impending attacks. Even in a world of electronic devices, human infiltration and interrogations remain indispensable, but how far should modern states go in the pursuit of such information? [...] commondreams.org Also worth a look: film.guardian.co.uk