What You Didn't See on the News

**The Reaper** · 04-13-2006, 14:40

Between the NY Times making up the news as they go, and the networks spinning it, here is a clip you did not see, but should have.

If the Dems want to be serious players on National Security, they have to do better then this.

Well said, Sergeant.

TR

http://www.siamlady.com/Movies/SgtMarkSeavey.wmv

Transcript of Army soldier who confronted Dem Reps. John Murtha and Jim Moran at a town hall meeting in Arlington, Va. Greyhawk transcribed the confrontation:

"Yes sir my name is Mark Seavey and I just want to thank you for coming up here. Until about a month ago I was Sgt Mark Seavey infantry squad leader, I returned from Afghanistan. My question to you, (applause)

"Like yourself I dropped out of college two years ago to volunteer to go to Afghanistan, and I went and I came back. If I didn't have a herniated disk now I would volunteer to go to Iraq in a second with my troops, three of which have already volunteered to go to Iraq. I keep hearing you say how you talk to the troops and the troops are demoralized, and I really resent that characterization. (applause) The morale of the troops that I talk to is phenomenal, which is why my troops are volunteering to go back, despite the hardships they had to endure in Afghanistan.

"And Congressman Moran, 200 of your constituents just returned from Afghanistan. We never got a letter from you; we never got a visit from you. You didn't come to our homecoming. The only thing we got from any of our elected officials was one letter from the governor of this state thanking us for our service in Iraq, when we were in Afghanistan. That's reprehensible. I don't know who you two are talking to but the morale of the troops is very high."

Moran - who is one of the few congressmen supporting Charlie Rangel's call to restore the draft - responded quickly: "That wasn't in the form of a question, it was in the form of a statement. But, uhh... let's go over here." And he took the next question.

Renee · 04-13-2006, 15:07

...If you are a heretic, there is no point in rebuking you, since you have blasphemed against Robert's Rules of Order. Now lets go over here...

Good on him for taking the time to speak out and be heard. I think I will be sending that one on.

Renee

MtnGoat · 04-13-2006, 15:13

I had that "video" emailed to me, I'll see if I can find it. for a link post.

Well said by him, just wonder if the Military got a hold of him??

**The Reaper** · 04-13-2006, 15:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by MtnGoat

I had that "video" emailed to me, I'll see if I can find it. for a link post.

Well said by him, just wonder if the Military got a hold of him??

The link to the video is already up there.

TR

**Airbornelawyer** · 04-13-2006, 15:47

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...01947_pf.html?

The Washington Post

Troops in Support Of the War
By Wade Zirkle
Thursday, April 13, 2006; A21

Quote:

Earlier this year there was a town hall meeting on the Iraq war, sponsored by Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), with the participation of such antiwar organizations as CodePink and MoveOn.org. The event also featured Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), a former Marine who had become an outspoken critic of the war. To this Iraq war veteran, it was a good example of something that's become all too common: People from politics, the media and elsewhere purporting to represent "our" views. With all due respect, most often they don't.

The tenor of the town meeting was mostly what one might expect, but during the question-and-answer period, a veteran injured in Afghanistan stood up to offer his view. "If I didn't have a herniated disc, I would volunteer to go to Iraq in a second with my troops," said Mark Seavey, a former Army sergeant who had recently returned from Afghanistan. "I know you keep saying how you have talked to the troops and the troops are demoralized, and I really resent that characterization. The morale of the troops I talk to is phenomenal, which is why my troops are volunteering to go back despite the hardships. . . ."

"And, Congressman Moran, 200 of your constituents just arrived back from Afghanistan -- we never got a letter, we never got a visit from you, you didn't come to our homecoming. The only thing we got was a letter from the governor of this state thanking us for our service in Iraq, when we were in Afghanistan. That's reprehensible. I don't know who you two are talking to, but the morale of the troops is very high."

What was the response? Murtha said nothing, while Moran attempted to move on, no pun intended, stating: "That wasn't in the form of a question, it was a statement."

It was indeed a statement; a statement from both a constituent and a veteran that should have elicited something more than silence or a dismissive comment highlighting a supposed breach of protocol. This exchange, captured on video (it was on C-SPAN), has since been forwarded from base to base in military circles. It has not been well received there, and it only raises the already high level of frustration among military personnel that their opinions are not being heard.

In view of his distinguished military career, John Murtha has been the subject of much attention from the media and is a sought-after spokesman for opponents of the Iraq war. He has earned the right to speak. But his comments supposedly expressing the negative views of those who have and are now serving in the Middle East run counter to what I and others know and hear from our own colleagues -- from junior officers to the enlisted backbone of our fighting force.

Murtha undoubtedly knows full well that the greatest single thing that drags on morale in war is the loss of a buddy. But second to that is politicians questioning, in amplified tones, the validity of that loss to our families, colleagues, the nation and the world.

While we don't question his motives, we do question his assumptions. When he called for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, there was a sense of respectful disagreement among most military personnel. But when he subsequently stated that he would not join today's military, he made clear to the majority of us that he is out of touch with the troops. Quite frankly, it was received as a slap in the face.

Like so many others past and present, I proudly volunteered to serve in the military. I served one tour in Iraq and then volunteered to go back. Veterans continue to make clear that they are determined to succeed in Iraq. They are making this clear the best way they can: by volunteering to go back for third and sometimes fourth deployments. This fact is backed up by official Pentagon recruitment reports released as recently as Monday.

The morale of the trigger-pulling class of today's fighting force is strong. Unfortunately, we have not had a microphone or media audience willing to report our comments. Despite this frustration, our military continues to proudly dedicate itself to the mission at hand: a free, democratic and stable Iraq and a more secure America. All citizens have a right to express their views on this important national challenge, and all should be heard. Veterans ask no more, and they deserve no less.

The writer is executive director of Vets for Freedom. He served two tours in Iraq with the Marines before being wounded in action.

aricbcool · 04-13-2006, 16:50

Good on him. Thanks TR.

--Aric

Warrior-Mentor · 04-13-2006, 16:59

Funny to watch, or in this case read about, a trooper with knowledge of ground truth put a politician in his place... "ah...um....ah...umm..next question (please)"

Maytime · 04-13-2006, 19:43

Quote:

That wasn't in the form of a question...

What a cop-out response.

**Ambush Master** · 04-13-2006, 19:48

He actually started out presenting it as a question, but the applause both cut him off and distracted him!! He was asking why didn't they support the Troops!!!

Goggles Pizano · 04-14-2006, 09:22

I half expected Moran to follow up with "I have no time for you knave, begone..."

MtnGoat · 04-14-2006, 09:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

The link to the video is already up there.

TR

PRK I guess didn't work for reading.

jbour13 · 04-14-2006, 11:09

I watched it about 4 times and really appreciate men and women like this. Outstanding is the only word I can think of. His comments on morale are spot on.

Thanks for the post TR.

zeroalpha · 04-14-2006, 17:53

SIlly question but...

The guy said he dropped out of college to go to A'stan... ok...

But its also said that he held the rank of Sgt?

How long does it take you guys to get promoted over there!!!

2 years from 0 to Sgt !?!?!

You gotta be kidding right?

Over here, you'd make L/Cpl (Lance Corpral) in 2 years...

**The Reaper** · 04-14-2006, 18:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by zeroalpha

SIlly question but...

The guy said he dropped out of college to go to A'stan... ok...

But its also said that he held the rank of Sgt?

How long does it take you guys to get promoted over there!!!

2 years from 0 to Sgt !?!?!

You gotta be kidding right?

Over here, you'd make L/Cpl (Lance Corpral) in 2 years...

The Army uses a strength management tool to control promotions and keep the right grade and specialties in balance.

E-5 is a semi-centralized promotion and soldiers will compete for it in front of a board once they are otherwise eligible. College, JROTC, or prior service allows you to start with a higher rank, up to E-4. An NCO school is normally required before making E-5. For E-5, it is Primary Leadership Development Course.

It is possible to make E-5 Sergeant in the Army in 24 months, most of the 18Xs will do it in 24 months or less. If you start as an E-4, it can be done in as little as 18 months. Since the lowest rank on an ODA is E-5, there are plenty of authorizations in SF for promotion up to E-7. Then it gets tough.

http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/armyp...promotions.htm

Private (E-2) - Six months time-in-grade (TIG) as a private (E-1).
Private First Class (E-3) - Four months TIG as a Private (E-2) and 12 months time-in-service (TIS).
Specialist/Corporal (E-4) - 6 months TIG with 24 months TIS.

Primary Zone

Sergeant (E-5) - 8 months TIG as an E-4 and 36 months (3 years) TIS.
Staff Sergeant (E-6) - 10 months TIG as an E-5 and 84 months (7 years) TIS.

Secondary Zone (Exceptional Performers)

Sergeant (E-5) - 4 months TIG and 18 months TIS.
Staff Sergeant (E-6) - 5 months TIG and 48 months (4 years) TIS.

Some other branches, like the Air Force and Marines are slower.

TR

groundup · 04-14-2006, 19:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by zeroalpha

SIlly question but...

The guy said he dropped out of college to go to A'stan... ok...

But its also said that he held the rank of Sgt?

How long does it take you guys to get promoted over there!!!

2 years from 0 to Sgt !?!?!

You gotta be kidding right?

Over here, you'd make L/Cpl (Lance Corpral) in 2 years...

It is quite possible he made E-5 from E-1 in 6 years, which is the most common enlistment period. Then again, he could have made it a lot faster. He has college credits so he could have enough to come in as an E-4. He could have been prior service. He could have been in the ARNG while in school. Whoever said it took him less than or equal to 6 years? He could be on his 3rd enlistment, he doesn't look that young.

On another note, he wasn't the only veteran there: http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004241.htm