Vets for Freedom takes the Hill

Carving out a niche for those who still care about victory

By Jeff Emanuel Posted in | | Comments (38) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

Photos by the author. More here.

Thirty representatives of the thousands-strong advocacy group Vets for Freedom, made up of veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, took Capitol Hill (specifically, the Russell Senate Office Building) by storm yesterday, meeting with Senators and their representatives and making their case for continued support of General Petraeus and the American effort in Iraq. I was there with them, as were RedState readers The Fastest Squirrel and Gideon1789.

Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) met separately with the group's representatives to start off the day. Both expressed their staunch support for the troops and for the mission, thanking each and every soldier, sailor, airman, and Marine there for their service and for their advocacy, and promising to do whatever they could to stave off the opposition who are seeking to declare defeat in Iraq for political gain, and Graham spoke forcefully against al Qaeda and Iran, who he said were "the two biggest killers of American soldiers" in that country, and derided the Democrat leadership for their "all night stunt" which was on the calendar for that evening. "Woooo, they're staying up all night. Very tough," said Graham, hs voice dripping with very welcome sarcasm. "Our soldiers are staying up all night tonight, too -- in firefights with the enemy, with al Qaeda."

Read on . . .

Fresh off the successful and friendly meetings with McCain and Graham, the group decided to go after Sen. John Warner (R-VA), one of the Republicans who has recently gone weak-kneed on Iraq and a cosponsor of the Warner-Lugar amendment (which would order President Bush to plan a withdrawal from Iraq). Warner wasn't available, but one of his military advisors -- an active duty Naval officer named Scott Suozzi -- sat down with the group for the better part of an hour, asking the veterans present for their take on the situation on the ground in Iraq, and attempting to explain -- very slowly, as though speaking to people who had no knowledge of politics whatsoever -- that, despite protestations to the contrary, opinion polls really should dictate American foreign policy, and the "separate but equal" doctrine really meant that Congress should dictate the tactics and strategy used in warfare.

"We have to have a contingency plan," said Suozzi, when asked why, while executing a new strategy -- and in the middle of the largest offensive since 2003 -- Senator Warner's top priority appeared to be preparing for defeat. "If you ask this administration what their plan is for bringing the troops home from Iraq, they look at you blankly and have nothing to say," he explained. "This would make them draw up that plan."

"No, sir," said a sergeant who served in Iraq with the 1st Infantry Division. "You don't engage in a fight, you especially don't change course to a strategy which is working, and then plan for losing. You plan for victory."

The poignant exchange continued with Suozzi's question of "What do you say if Gen. Petraeus comes back in September and says nothing has changed, that he can't make a difference? You have to have a contingency plan for that."

Said the 1st ID soldier, "What if he says that the plan's working?" -- the response to which was, "Well, we'll cross that bridge when we come to it." (Apparently "contingency planning" only applies to hedging for defeat, not victory -- but that is an aside and perhaps another subject).

Other than the above, the most notable statement made by Warner's representative was his claim that the Senate's 81-0 confirmation represented an affirmation of the President's "right to select and appoint people for positions," and was not "an endorsement of the 'Surge'" or any other strategy -- a weak position at best, and one which sidesteps responsibility for approving the current course of action in Iraq at worst.

"Sen. Warner has been one of the most staunch supporters of the President on 95% of things," Suozzi declared. "We can't keep issuing blank checks."

"With all due respect, sir," came the sergeant's reply, "that doesn't wash. You don't go 95% of the way to victory then declare defeat. When I was in Fallujah, we didn't clear 95% of the city, then say, 'well, that's all we can do -- better go home now!' Sir you stick with the fight all the way to victory, or you bring everybody home right now. There's no in between."

After leaving that meeting, the group broke up into smaller contingents, each of whom spent the better part of two hours seeking out Senators and staffers, both Democrat and Republican, with whom to share their concerns or their gratitude for each's position on the Iraq war.

The day concluded in the Capitol Building, where a joint press conference featuring Vets for Freedom executive director Pete Hegseth and Sens. McCain, Graham, Joe Lieberman (I-CT), and Mitch McConnell (R-KY) was held. Also in attendance behind the podium were Texas Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn, and a handful of other officeholders, as well as some members of Vets for Freedom and a severely wounded Army soldier, who was transported over for the event from Walter Reed, where he has been undergoing face and hand surgeries to repair and replace parts of his body severely damaged by an IED in Iraq.

Each of the speakers not only thanked the servicemen there for their sacrifices to their country, but redeclared their commitment to preventing the Congressional opposition from surrendering to al Qaeda in Iraq, and to ensuring that no war supplemental with withdrawal dates included would pass the Senate if they had their way.

"We are not 'filibustering' anything," said Sen. McConnell, referring to the press coverage of the "A 'filibuster' is a continuation of debate to prevent a vote.

The Senate has been debating Iraq all year and Republicans welcome further debate. I have offered the Democrat Leadership the opportunity to have a series of votes...they objected. There is no need to further delay votes on these important amendments with what a senior Democrat aide characterized as ‘a political stunt.’ Our soldiers and the American people expect more from us.

Said McCain:

Though politics and popular opinion may be pushing us in one direction, to take the easy course, we as elected leaders have a greater responsibility. A measure of courage is required. Not the great courage exhibited by the brave men and women fighting today in Iraq and Afghanistan, but a smaller measure, the courage necessary to put our country’s interests before every personal or political consideration.

Pete Hegseth made his remarks, as well, affirming General Petraeus and his strategy, reiterating his belief that America is not a nation of quitters, and imploring the Senators who were not present to pay less attention to politics and more to the reality in Iraq now, as experienced by the veterans present and as portrayed by Petraeus himself, saying:

Make no mistake, the group you see here, which was assembled in just four days and paid for on their own dime, is not alone. We've got a lot of our guys out there still meeting with senators as we speak. And you should know these guys represent thousands of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans who are deeply troubled at the defeatist sentiment emanating from Capitol Hill.

We think we can win in Iraq. We know we can win in Iraq. We've seen it; we've been there; we understand the stakes. And setting a deadline for defeat is just not an option.

We're on Capitol Hill today, and we'll be back again in September, to tell our representatives and senators to give our nation's warriors, led by General Petraeus and his new counterinsurgency strategy, the time and resources necessary to defeat America's enemies.

His strategy is working. Security is improving. Al Qaida and company are on the run.

But make no mistake about it. We are in a fight in Iraq. We're facing a radical enemy there who's capitalized on three-plus years of failed policy and knows that while they cannot defeat American troops on the battlefield, they can seek to undermine America's political will, through suicide bombers, roadside bombs and snipers.

And that's why we're here today -- to tell Congress and the American people that we cannot allow politicians in Washington, motivated by election cycles, to make decisions about this war. Too much is at stake.

General Petraeus just received the troops he needed in Baghdad. The strategy he has is showing progress.

And while Iraqi political progress is certainly not where it should be, the security improvements American soldiers are purchasing in blood and sweat are a necessary precondition for political progress and a stable Iraq that denies haven to Al Qaida and company.

So we say to Congress, let General Petraeus and the troops do their job. They want to win.

The message presented by Vets for Freedom on the Hill Tuesday was clear: America is better than the political games being played, and deserves better than the orchestrated defeat Senators from both side of the aisle appear to be working toward so cavalierly.

The question about Iraq has never been whether or not there was a ground truth there known by some men and women. The question has been whether or not those men and women -- whichever among them it might be -- would be granted the venue to share that ground truth with the multitudes who have no idea what the current situation in Iraq is.

With the platform provided by the organization Vets for Freedom -- and by some key, patriotic Senators for that organization -- the experienced pro-victory side of the Iraq debate may finally have found its voice.

With General Petraeus's testimony coming up in just a few short weeks, that voice cannot have been found a moment too soon.

« Mortgage Relief: Senate Republicans BlinkComments (20) | Coleman comfortably ahead in MN-Sen 2008Comments (3) »
Vets for Freedom takes the Hill 38 Comments (0 topical, 38 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

It sounds like the reporters there showed about as much interest in the group as the Democratic Senators did.

In my view, the most noteworthy event that took place in Washington yesterday was Vets For Freedom's appearance at the Capitol to argue for victory in Iraq. Others apparently didn't share that opinion, however. The Washington Post made no mention of VFF in today's paper. One might have thought that the Minneapolis Star Tribune would be interested, since Lt. Pete Hegseth, the group's executive director, is a Minnesotan. No article there, either. And the Associated Press didn't do a story.
...
Pete's eloquent talk drew exactly one question from the assembled reporters. Only a handful of questions were asked in total, nearly all of them hostile. One reporter asked, "Senator McConnell, what do you think should happen after September, if progress has not been made?" McConnell declined to speculate, and John McCain interjected:

You know, I always enjoy hearing what we're going to do if General Petraeus's strategy doesn't succeed. What are we going to do if the withdrawal results in chaos and genocide?

We don't hear that question. I'd like to hear that asked a little more often.

We're delighted to pass all of this on. It's too bad you aren't likely to read about it anywhere else.

of course.

Join the Win the War campaign, joshlevy@yahoo.com, www.win-the-war.com.
Our leaders waver, but we can give them the courage they need.

...and with his campaign collapse he is of no more use to them.

If the Vets want coverage, they need to pull a Kerry and dump their crutches and decorations outside the White House fence, testify falsely at phoney-baloney Congressional Hearings, and pose for photo-ops with Code Pink.

Belief in the mission, loyalty to the Chain of Command, and keeping faith with Comrades still in the field is, sadly, not newsworthy according to current editorial judgment.

--furious

"I find your lack of faith disturbing." -- Darth Vader

...Sen. Warner's (R-VA) military Representative. As I mentioned above,

The poignant exchange continued with the Warner representative's question of "What do you say if Gen. Petraeus comes back in September and says nothing has changed, that he can't make a difference? You have to have a contingency plan for that."

Said the 1st ID soldier, "What if he says that the plan's working?" -- the response to which was, "Well, we'll cross that bridge when we come to it." (Apparently "contingency planning" only applies to hedging for defeat, not victory -- but that is an aside and perhaps another subject).

Call me crazy... by stephen bozich

...it wouldn't be first time, and I am sure it won't be the last.

I was reading the roll of votes cast by Senators for cloture of Levin-Reed. Next to D-NV Reid was Nay. which means the Senate majority leader, after calling this slumber party ended up voting against the measure?
WTF?! If it is a typo then it was one repeated again and again at Senate.gov.
I haven't heard anyone discuss this.
Why would the leader of Democrats in the Senate vote against cloture for a bill that would force redeployment of troops within 120 days? And why hasn't anyone asked this question?
Please, help me out.

Blue and Yellow make Green!

it was obvious the amendment had been defeated, he changed his vote. The reason is that a Senator voting "no" can resubmit the amendment. It's a parliamentary measure that's been followed by Majority Leader's of both parties.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

so that he could bring it up for reconsideration later. Same thing happened with the immigration bill. It seems weird, but this is a common parliamentary tactic.

Look at it this way by Neil Stevens

What if the people on the losing side of a vote could repeatedly ask for a new vote? Nothing could ever get done. So, the rules require that motions to reconsider come from people on the winning side of a vote. So, Sen. Reid has to vote with the winning side when the cause is already lost, in case he wants to try again.

Run like Reagan!

I figured as much.... by stephen bozich

but I wasn't sure of the exact mechanics behind the move. Thanks for the info. I'm gonna hafta find myself a copy of the Senate rules book.

Blue and Yellow make Green!

..."Reply to This" link.

Lindsey Graham, the one who has fought to ensure terrorists can "lawyer up" to the max, and the one who personally made military tribunals impossible to conduct, has the temerity to claim "staunch support for the troops and the mission".

What baloney!

I'm from South Carolina. There are four republicans lining up to run against Graham in the primary.

My bet is he gets dusted! And good riddance!

or else SC will end up splitting the anti-Graham vote and he'll end up going back to Washington.

about the Military Commissions Act. Look who is standing in the middle of the photo with the President as he signs the MCA into law.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/10/images/20061017-1_p10170...

And here is what Bush said about the bill.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061017-1.html

Not sure you what you are talking about when you say the detainees are getting "lawyered up." Detainees like KSM who go before military tribunals in the future will have lawyers -- military lawyers -- representing them. What's wrong with that?

Also, if you paid attention to what he said previously, he's admitted committing dozens of acts of violence against Americans. He did not appear to be shy about taking "credit" for his terrible acts.

Great job Jeff by Darin H

Let me thank Jeff, The Fastest Squirrel and Gideon1789 for going yesterday (and all the others who participated). And a big thank you to the Vets for Freedom for putting this together so quickly. Great job! Thanks to Sens McCain and Graham for meeting with them and standing strong on the war no matter the other differences in policy we've had.

It's painful to see that we could lose this war, not on any battlefield, but in DC. I don't know how we further get the word out about this with the MSM silence on it, maybe we could have a follow up with a few of us writing letters to the editors talking about the media ignoring veterans?

___________________________________
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson

pro-victory groups to establish a larger umbrella group and simultaneously reach out to the grassroots to demonstrate and build upon popular support.

Email me if you're interested - joshlevy@yahoo.com

Join the Win the War campaign, joshlevy@yahoo.com, www.win-the-war.com.
Our leaders waver, but we can give them the courage they need.

Except that by stephen bozich

the editors are less likely to ignore you if you write to them? Isn't it a fundemental precept of journalism that you explore all relevant sides of a story? Apparently those who support the war (and those who fight it) are irrelevant in the eyes of the media.

The more things change.

Blue and Yellow make Green!

Outstanding by exitsfunnel

It's always great when our servicemen make the effort to have their voices heard in the political realm. On the same topic, it's interesting to note for whom they're money is talking:

The Troops Have Spoken

-exits

Disclaimer by exitsfunnel

Hit the post button a bit to soon. Meant to identify myself as an unabashed (and 15-year) supporter of Ron Paul and also mention that while I'm encouraged by those numbers I have to admit to being a bit dubious of both them and the site. If anyone has anything which refutes them or otherwise minimizes what they represent, I'd love to see it.

-exits

and the info is complete crap.

Especially the part about USMC donations to Ron Paul. We know lots of Marines and families, I don't know of one who would give Ron Paul the time of day, let alone money.

The onus isn't on others to debunk the information, it's on the owners of the website to prove their data.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

Agreed by bs

I just went to the FEC link that site provides and looked at Paul's contributions by employer. I just looked at the USAF contributions (as a sample), and the numbers don't add up to what they claim.

Simply putting a bunch of numbers on a page and linking to a web site with some raw stats does nothing to demonstrate how they came to their (dubious) conclusions.

All that information tells me is that Paul supporters are what I suspected - human bodies inhabited by alien beings. Get out the sugar...

US Air Force is listed at least 3 different ways and if you add them up, they equal the totals stated on the web page. I didn't look at the other candidate's numbers, but the Ron Paul numbers appear to be accurate and based on the official election fundraising disclosures.

Excellent Post Jeff by Marcus Traianus

Thanks for sharing this. My heartfelt thanks to FS, Gid. and the Vet's also for their efforts.

How about we get some additional posts from the veteran attendees about their personal experiences both in Iraq and on the Hill?

"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"
Contributor to The Minority Report

Indeed. by streetwise

And to add to Marcus's suggestion, could you get the vets to opine as to which environment is more toxic - Iraq or Capitol Hill?

Just a thought!

who are turning on the war? From incumbents to challengers like Mike Powers in New York. www.powersforcongress.com What can we do to help his opponent?

grow up to be Chuck Hagel.

Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.

Those clever Dems nearly gave us a chance to win in '08 but we shot the escape raft. Leave it to Dem to think the lives of people are so damned important that they should try to get rid of the biggest Republican political liability Nixon. And we stood by the President...do you really think that Bush would stand by any of our guys if the going got tough that silver spoon wimp has never thought of anyone but himself.

____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

1:11 (nt) by Jeff Emanuel

It was a very cool meet... by The Fastest Squirrel

I barely got out of uniform in time to get to the press conference (in progress)... the only guy to show up in a ball cap and Harley t-shirt. I did get quite a few gulps from the journalists as the back of my shirt had a huge American Flag with the words "Never Forgive, Never Forget. 9/11/01." Nice.

It was good to finally meet Jeff... he is much uglier in person.

Ouch. ;-) (nt) by Jeff Emanuel

LOL. by The Fastest Squirrel

n/t

right behind you at a couple points.

Glad you could be there!

Join the Win the War campaign, joshlevy@yahoo.com, www.win-the-war.com.
Our leaders waver, but we can give them the courage they need.

Thanks for all your good work, Jeff

www.win-the-war.com

Join the Win the War campaign, joshlevy@yahoo.com, www.win-the-war.com.
Our leaders waver, but we can give them the courage they need.

Excellent site, BTW<nt> by Repair Man Jack

I'd rather see Gore get oxed than my ox get gored.

i need it to be something as easy to use as www.numbersusa.com but with more "take action" items than sending faxes.

Join the Win the War campaign, joshlevy@yahoo.com, www.win-the-war.com.
Our leaders waver, but we can give them the courage they need.

R-I-G-H-T O-N !!! by jerryberube

R-I-G-H-T O-N !!!

R-I-G-H-T O-N !!! by jerryberube

R-I-G-H-T O-N !!!

 
Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)


©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service