Arkin over at WaPo is soundin a wee bit testy: somebody tole him STFU once too often

[struggle4progress]

William M. Arkin on National and Homeland Security

The Troops Also Need to Support the American People

I've been mulling over an NBC Nightly News report from Iraq last Friday in which a number of soldiers expressed frustration with opposition to war in the United States ...

Through every Abu Ghraib and Haditha, through every rape and murder, the American public has indulged those in uniform, accepting that the incidents were the product of bad apples or even of some administration or command order ...

The notion of dirty work is that, like laundry, it is something that has to be done but no one else wants to do it. But Iraq is not dirty work: it is not some necessary endeavor; the people just don't believe that anymore.

I'll accept that the soldiers, in order to soldier on, have to believe that they are manning the parapet, and that's where their frustrations come in. I'll accept as well that they are young and naïve and are frustrated with their own lack of progress and the never changing situation in Iraq. Cut off from society and constantly told that everyone supports them, no wonder the debate back home confuses them ...

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2007/01/the_troops_also_need_to_suppor.html

The Arrogant and Intolerant Speak Out

Well, one thing's abundantly clear about who will actually defend our rights to say what we believe: It isn't the hundreds who have written me saying they are soldiers or veterans or war supporters or real Americans -- who also advise me to move to another country, to get f@##d, or to die a painful, violent death.

Contrary to the typically inaccurate and overstated assertion in dozens of blogs, hundreds of comments, and thousands of e-mails I've received, I've never written that soldiers should "shut up," quit whining, be spit upon, or that they have no right to an opinion ...

... I understand people need to believe that the United States is engaged in a grand and noble mission to continue to support the deaths and sacrifices being made by American forces. Nonetheless, there is also an equally valid opinion that not only is the United States NOT involved in some fight for our lives in Iraq but that our military actions merely increases and complicates our insecurities tomorrow ...

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2007/02/the_arrogant_and_intolerant_sp.html

A Note to My Readers on Supporting the Troops

... When I hear soldiers and war supporters expressing their frustrations about the American public or the news media, something doesn't quite seem right -- even when the soldiers and war supporters aren't talking about me. I know that those in uniform would like to bring the war to an honorable conclusion, but are they blaming those who are against the war and the news media for having tied their hands under a Bush administration which is certainly the most warrior-oriented in the past 20 years? Is there no space for respectful acceptance of the possibility that people who also love the nation and care about our security think that the country is wasting national treasure - lives and money - on an unwinnable cause?

In the middle of all of this are the troops, the pawns in political battles at home as much as they are on the real battlefield. We unquestioningly "support" these troops for the very reasons that they are pawns. We give them what we can to be successful, and we have a contract with them, because they are our sons and daughters and a part of us, not to place them in an impossible spot.

In our instant and globally wired world, these very men and women are additionally burdened by their access to our debates and words. This is a difficulty of our modern world, but I completely reject the notion though that we undermine them or support the enemy by debating at home.

I also reiterate my core point, which is that military attitudes should not serve as a censor of the civilian debate at home, either literally or through intimidation ...

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2007/02/post_11.html

[kstewart33]

1. The commenters ripped him to shreds.

If you want a picture of the fascist minds in America, go read what they wrote. It isn't pretty.

[Kagemusha]

2. His point in the note to readers seems to be...

the nation's civilian population has support for the war blackmailed out of it with the lives of the troops, or the mere prospect of the lives of the troops being lost.

Not like the system allows anyone's opinion either than Bush's to reign absent of impeachment or cutting off of funds by Congress (which is quite vulnerable to such blatant blackmail) but certainly, the lives of the troops are used to wring support and shut down debate.

[grasswire]

3. they've been after him big time

The WH has tried to shut him up.