4/13/2008
Martial Bling
This has got to be one of the most stupid complaints from a leftist of all time. Naturally, it’s a complaint coming from a civilian point of view, because in general, leftists don’t know or understand military culture, and seem to be - not only afraid of what they don’t know - but have citicism, contempt and disdain for it. And they have particular disdain for General P. But what do you want from a clueless moonbatty journalist, anyway? We’ve come to EXPECT this.
Curt, TSO at the Sniper John at This Ain’t Hell and others have made comments about this LA Times article Petraeus’ ‘ribbon creep’
There he sits in elaborate Army regalia, four stars glistening on each shoulder, nine rows of colorful ribbons on his left breast, and various other medallions, brooches and patches scattered across the rest of the available real estate on his uniform. He even wears his name tag, a lone and incongruous hunk of cheap plastic in a region of pristine gilt, just in case the politicians aren’t sure who he is.
That’s a lot of martial bling, especially for an officer who hadn’t seen combat until five years ago.
Can’t you just see a person saying these words with that superior intellectual elitist sneer on their face? This is yet more evidence of how far away a leftist is from military culture.
The military has rules and regs about what you’re supposed to do with your uniform, and where awards are placed on it. You wear what you earn; there’s a specific regulation on it, in fact; AR 670-1 “Wear and Appearance of Army Uniform and Insignia”..
What is amazing to me is that someone would write an article, in effect patting himself on the back for being so intelligent; who is using pop culture as a basis for comparison to someone who has earned the Ranger tab, for example; and German jump wings. You can’t hold a candle to men who’ve served who’ve collected this sort of experience; there is nothing in the civilian world that compares to it - even in a remote way.
Badges you earn in Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts are also to be worn in a certain way, those are outlined in the the manuals–and I always thought it was a natural progression from childhood in scouting and earning your badges, wearing your uniform, etc.- to serving in adulthood in some military capacity.
“Bling” doesn’t exist in military culture. When you have medals, ribbons or commendations, it’s because you earned them.
Bling is civilian excessiveness- something you pick up somewhere at some high-priced store like celebrities do–ordering 16 pairs of a designer something-or-other in every color available. Our culture is so riddled with this nonsense that mothers are taking their grammar-school-age daughters to spas for a bikini wax, for microderm abrasion and to have their hair colored. And that says nothing of a culture that glorifies rape, cheapens sexuality and glorifies material THINGS.
This individual is mistaking General Petreaus and the Army for Michael Jackson and the world of theatre, rap and “bling”. There is no “bling” in military culture - it’s about duty, honor, country.
It’s an orderly world, where you can see at a glance exactly what someone’s rank is. And as I’ve witnessed at events, there is a pecking order, and a chain of command, that causes certain uniformed passersby on the street to salute a commanding officer.
This is evident no matter what style of dress someone is wearing - combat uniform, army green, service uniform, or dress uniform. (I don’t think you wear anything identifying your rank when you’re in your PT gear.) Here’s the tip for the idiot who wrote that article: Petraeus is required to wear his dress uniform when testifying in front of Congress…and that’s the other thing. There are a number of styles of dress, and they’re all for different utilitarian purposes.
You don’t have to be military to know this - it’s easy to look up!!!!
April 13th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
I find the partisan nature of this post very disturbing. While looking for good discussion on military life, and military culture, I discovered this post. While I was expecting to see an open minded argument towards the virtues of military regalia within civilian government, I found a blindly pro-military statement disregarding the importance of civilian control and civilian checks on the military. It is unclear to me why you label the insult of “bling” as mere left rather than taking a look at the deeper connotations of a military leader who, records show, does not have enough military experience to qualify him to lead this mission.
It seemed the comment was more to question his abilities for leading, and the “bling”, as the article put…seems to be covering up his lack of experience. But, as your article correctly put, the General did have to earn the decorations that he wears. And yes, it is tradition for him to be in full regalia in order to present himself to the civilian commanders. I just wonder, given how you began this article, how you see the importance of those civilian commanders.
April 13th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
boo-hoo-hoo!!!. I really don’t appreciate your opening salvo there. I make no bones about my position on issues, read my bio, and get a life. If you don’t like the ‘partisan position’ that is taken here, then LEAVE.
So you think that Petreaus isn’t qualified. Three months before Petreaus was assigned to Iraq, he was in a soup kitchen smoking crack. Oh. He wasn’t? Oh, he is a military genius, a four star general. I’m sorry, but Dwight D. Eisenhower is dead, so some of the geniuses we’d like to have on this thing are not available. They don’t hand out stars like P. Diddy buys diamond encrusted watches - and he went through the Clinton years while earning his so-called *bling*.
From a captain in the Marine Corps, written as he winds up a seven-month deployment-in response to the media treatment of Gen. Petraeus’ latest report to Congress:
And you libtards don’t even care about the consequences of the defeat you yearn for so badly. What’s it going to take - another devastating disaster like 9/11 before you wake up? If you’re such a self-loathing America hater, why don’t you just shoot yourself in the foot and leave Gen P. alone to do his job??? Is the success of the surge that disturbing for you?
From January of 2007-
That’s what happens when you perform well in the military…we could compare this to Barack Obama’s rise to fame, who was a freshman senator and was handed all kinds of advantages without the “experience” to back it up.
Perhaps that’s what bothers people like you - the fact that Gen. P. has been successful, so you’re finding any way you can to knock that down or discredit him. It’s been that way since early on in this war; a nation divided in wartime is a nation that invites its own defeat; and that’s precisely how Americans are facing the global war that radical Islamists have declared on them. For all their railing about ‘unity’, leftists sure are devisive and hateful.
This kid that wrote the article has a computer, he could google it up just as well as I can; it has little to do with ‘experience’. You can write about things you’re not familiar with - but you look like a dummy when you don’t educate yourself on it. I’m not sure what you mean by ‘the importance of civilian commanders’….except when the Clintons were in office, they didn’t want our military walking the halls of the Whitehouse in uniform. And the ‘civilian commanders’ is one of the reasons we’re in the mess we’re in - because they micromanage from their offices without knowing or understanding what’s going on. Untie the hands of our guys and let them do their jobs, is what I say.
The point that needs to be made is the civilians need to get ‘with it’ as far as military matters go, considering that today, they’re far removed from knowing people who serve, and the elitist universities have thrown the recruiters off campus. This article just proves the ‘partisan anti-military bias’ of the media.
April 14th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Wow.
I did my best to actually be polite, and this is how you respond? I’ll remain polite, despite your attempt to be confrontive. If you are interested in continuing this dialogue, I would encourage you to do the same. I’m only asking for basic courtesy, nothing else.
1. I encourage you to re-read what I said, and what the article says, rather than setting up a strawman argument. Your entire response was a strawman. Next time, maybe you should ask me what I meant, or try to understand what the other side is saying rather than going off on questionable rants. You were very far off on my personal stances on this entire conflict.
Allow me to demonstrate that I actually understand your position by restating it using my own words:
2. You feel General Petraeus is more than qualified to lead the American soldiers. He is in Iraq and really is doing his absolute best to follow his orders. Moreso, you feel personally threatened whenever someone questions anything to do with him. We live in dangerous times and there is a need for us to protect ourselves by eliminating the possible threats before they strike us (Israeli military strategy).
Now, I will also end with me pointing out a flaw in your response. And I will do it in a polite way.
3. I did not see, in your response, General Petraeus’ military experience. I mean, you could have talked about Petraeus’ experience with “Operation Desert Spring” or “Operation Joint Forge”, both do demonstrate his experience in leading large forces. In “Operation Joint Forge”, you could have pointed out his experience in…not only nation building, but working with diverse forces. There is plenty of information on these Operations online and many papers written on it which shows his experiences, and illustrates his lack of experience as well.
So if you’d actually be interested in a discussion on it, I would be more than happy to. If not, that’s okay too.
Take care
April 15th, 2008 at 11:45 am
Corwin, the way Congress treats General Petraeus, quite frankly, I TAKE EXCEPTION TO!
Since when is it Open Season in America to take cheap shots at an honorable man following military protocol??? If you are trying to sound “in the know” you just sound plain stupid, and you offend me with your not so, well thought out comment.
Nice job on the post and comment Cao.
April 15th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
Thanks, HAM. Corwin posted another response, but honestly, I have better things to do with my time. To publish or not to publish. That is the question.
They do it to get attention, so it is my hope that they will stop trying when they don’t get any attention. They use my comments section as a soapbox…and it grows tiring.
April 15th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Corwin, you didn’t see the experience of Gen. P. that I posted there because you’re willfully blind, just like all the rest of your ideological brethren.
So you might as well hang it up; there is no reason to entertain a ‘discussion’ when it’s entirely one-sided; like the article was.
April 18th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Wow…
I didn’t try to sound like I was in the know, nor did I attempt to do anything disrespectful towards the General nor towards you to fine ladies. All I did was mention ways it is possible to critique the good General.
If you do not agree with what I said in my post, that’s okay. We’re all allowed to have our own opinions on the matter. But please do not project yourself onto me. You claim I’m using you as a “soapbox”, but that would imply you’re important enough to use. I found this webpage on accident, while looking for responses towards the good General. Do not mistake accidents for something else. I try to be respectful, but it seems like you’re seeing something here which does not exist.
And it sounds like you both were intimidated with my response. It was not my attempt to intimidate either of you. But I would suggest stopping blind dogmatism and learn to think for yourselves. It’s not about winning or losing in a democracy. It’s about having the ability to have an open dialogue and sharing ideas. If you don’t believe me, read Madison’s notes on the Continental Convention, or any biographies on the founding fathers. Their belief in an open education system (Washington, Jefferson) and of open dialogue (Adams, Franklin) are proof enough of that.
This’ll be my last reply on here, since I can see it is falling on deaf ears. I can only hope the rest of America isn’t as blind as you.
Take care
April 18th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
Well, my dear, my blog must have some value to you because you keep coming back with your spew.
bwahhahaha!