The Beauchamp story: Why we care
posted at 11:15 am on July 28, 2007 by Bryan
How important, in the grand scheme of the war, is the Scott Thomas Beauchamp story? By itself, it’s not all that important. But contrary to the opinions of those who can’t be bothered to care about it but nonetheless opine on it for whatever reason, and then mainly to downplay its importance, Beauchamp hasn’t happened all by itself and to those of us who served, its context and trajectory make it very important.
Starting with the Vietnam war, the American public has been divided on the military question. A majority before, during and even after that war will claim that it supports and respects the military, but words are cheap and the actions of some tell a very different story. Some of those who say in a poll that they generically respect the military were undoubtedly among those who called returning troops “babykillers” as they spat on them. Some of those who claim to support the military only support it when it isn’t being used to defend the country, and even then they spend their time trying to cut the defense budget even while international threats mount and multiply. Some of those who claim to support the military look down upon those who choose to join it as either children who joined solely for the benefits, or thugs who joined because they love violence. And some of those who claim to support the military mistrust it and its intentions and see its members as the weapons of a fascist state.
Somewhere in all those descriptions, you’ll find the motivations that led TNR to publish the writings of Scott Thomas Beauchamp but not J. D. Johannes, Pat Dollard, Michael Yon, Michael Totten or any of the writings published by those of us who have been to Iraq for whatever length of time and have things to say about the troops and the war. TNR sought out a war critic, but not any war critic: TNR sought out a war critic whose writings either smeared the troops or exposed serious discipline problems among the troops. And examining the details of his writings, it became clear to many veterans and non-veterans alike that Beauchamp simply wasn’t writing the truth, and was therefore letting the men in his unit down by exposing them to unfair criticism. He was also reinforcing several stereotypes that many of those who claim to support the troops hold: That they’re dehumanized animals. Beauchamp’s work is today’s equivalent of calling the troops “babykillers,” only from inside the military where presumably the person tossing the insult will be insulated by his having “absolute moral authority.” TNR got to take part in the awful anti-military activities of the last lost war, but in a new and more pernicious way, by replacing smelly hippies with a man in uniform in the war zone.
There were few who stood up for the troops after Vietnam, but that’s a shame that shouldn’t be and won’t be repeated. The Beauchamp story comes down to a simple thing that most who never served in the military may not understand, and that’s the linked concepts of service and honor. It’s an honor to serve in the US military. With that honor comes responsibility not to besmirch the uniform or let down your comrades. Some obviously don’t live up to that honor. It’s up to the rest of us to protect that honor, keep its value high and keep the traditions of the service worthy of honor.
Throughout the Scott Thomas affair, no one was saying that atrocities can’t and don’t happen — they do. But remarkably, in this war our troops have committed far fewer war crimes than in any other conflict. Far fewer. Military training is different now from what it was in previous wars, and the rules of engagement are far tighter than they were in previous wars. It was routine during World War II, for instance, to capture enemy soldiers, extract information from them, and then shoot them because the advancing US troops had no way to keep them. Gitmo was nearly unthinkable, and granting captured enemy troops access to our courts would have been thought insane (and still ought to be, imho.) This war has seen far fewer casualties for our side, far less collateral damage for the civilian population in the war zones, and far fewer atrocities committed by our troops than by any other force in any previous war in the modern era and probably in all of history. By historic standards, this has been one of the most antiseptic wars ever and our troops have behaved exceptionally well under grueling and often confusing conditions.
But even though all of that is true, we still have TNR’s out there willing to publish whatever unchecked smears against our troops they can get their hands on. If they still knew how to feel shame, I’d say “Shame on them.” But they don’t, or they would be aware of all I’ve said and would never have published Scott Thomas Beauchamp. They would have done more than pass his tales around to check them for smell. That’s not to say that they didn’t know what they were doing, though. They did. And when the smear merchants strike, it’s up to those of us who are in the best positions to refute them, to do so, or the smears will stand as fact. Beauchamp wasn’t the first to smear the troops as a veteran or former veteran, and he won’t be the last. Future Scott Beauchamps should always know that there are others out there, who have also worn the boots and uniform, who always stand ready and able to face them down. It’s the right thing to do.
Besides all of that, truth matters. “Fake but accurate” amounts to a lie, TNR. And in a post-modern war such as the one we’re fighting, and especially as we place more emphasis on the morality of our actions in war than on actually winning it by defeating the enemy, Beauchamp represents an informational attack on our ability to wage war. Words are weapons. Loss of morale leads to loss in war, by the way we fight wars now. Letting his smears stand has the potential of letting another toilet-Koran story to get out there into the infowar zone unchallenged. So again, stopping that from happening is just the right thing to do.
Update: Via Ace, Mr. Foer, where’s the mass grave? Explain Beauchamp’s assertion that the Iraqi police are the only ones in Iraq who use Glocks, the bullets casings of which have “square backs.”
Just the facts, in other words.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
I’m trying to imagine 300 reporters holding off a million Persians at the valley of Thermopylae. Hmm. The action line while a Republican holds office is that America and every expression of America, including of course its military, is bad.
The next Republican president better not grin and bear it. We need somebody who will fight back and expose the traitors for what they are.
Mojave Mark on July 28, 2007 at 11:24 AM
Great post Bryan……
I wear my ‘spit’ with pride. Sad Sack Thomas you’re welcome to add to the ‘rack’ as long as you are willing to let me return the favor.
The thing my son hates the most…..’Hi. I really support you guys, but don’t support the war.’……he has nearly lost a stripe or two over that BS.
Limerick on July 28, 2007 at 11:29 AM
In every walk of life you have bad eggs.
In the Marine Corps we call them “ shitbirds”
They are just demotivated flotsam.
If you throw in to the mix, an anti-American news rag, and a pinko-commie reporter, voilà.
TheSitRep on July 28, 2007 at 11:39 AM
In every walk of life you have bad eggs.
In the Marine Corps we call them “sh*tbirds”
They are just demotivated flotsam.
If you throw in to the mix, an anti-American news rag, and a pinko-commie reporter, voilà.
TheSitRep on July 28, 2007 at 11:40 AM
The reason most people are divided on the military is because wars are run by politicians and does not have the stomach to do what is necesssary to do what is required to win. If we withdraw from Iraq millions of innocents will be slaughtered and the average American will not even miss a meal. The only time we should go to war is when thousands of Americans have been murdered and then and only then with a time limit on it so we don’t lose interest and withdraw showing our lack of will.
volsense on July 28, 2007 at 11:42 AM
Nice work, Bryan. You nailed it.
‘Besides all of that, truth matters.’
Apparently not to everyone, and that’s the difference between being on the right side or the wrong side of the whole issue.
Readymade on July 28, 2007 at 11:42 AM
Nice post.
reaganaut on July 28, 2007 at 11:52 AM
Excellent post, Bryan. I can’t understand why the MSM can’t see the bigger picture here. Or, maybe, they don’t want to, which is worse.
amerpundit on July 28, 2007 at 11:52 AM
Bryan, you are so right as far as you go. But I would argue that the pernicious and evil doctrine of “Non-violence” plays a large role motivating the hatred of the military.
From my many discussion with moonbats–essentially everyone I know–the only winning arguments I have found against moonbat military hatred involve attacking “Non-violence” directly. I usually start by quoting Gandhi’s suggestion that Jews should kill them in response to Hitler’s aggression. I then go on to point out that given human history, there are no guarantees that they won’t be a next war and abundant reasons to believe that there will be. & don’t you rather think the muslims are acting rather mean towards everybody else? I sometimes penetrate their defense shields. I don’t think they would ever get the point unless “Non-violence” is attacked directly.
And when you attack “Non-violence”, do it like Ann Coulter would. Don’t say any accommodating BS, like “Non-violence” is a noble philosophy but sadly impractical. Say instead that “Non-violence” is cowardly nonsense that deserves only contempt.
thuja on July 28, 2007 at 11:55 AM
Right you are Bryan. It is the beginning of an important narrative. When I first read about the 9-11 conspiracy theories, that the Pentagon was not really hit with an airplane, I just shrugged it off. I thought the motive was simply to make it believable that the U.S. government could do such a thing. I never expected so many people would swallow the theory as Truth.
TNR’s motive may be simply to cause people to believe that the troops may be monsters but already some people believe that the Boy Chump stories are literally true. Focusing on the details only makes it worse. President Bush falsely believes that “the truth will out”. Well no it won’t. The Clinton technique of just repeating a lie over and over works better.
Please keep up the pressure. If an oft repeated lie works then just maybe an oft repeated truth will work too.
TunaTalon on July 28, 2007 at 11:59 AM
Well done post, Bryan.
When I hear “I support the troops but not the war” I always ask “And just how do you support them?” I’ve yet to receive an intelligent response. I guess it’s true….you can wade through a liberal’s thoughts and not get the top of your toes wet.
PatrickS on July 28, 2007 at 11:59 AM
“to an unknown Grave”
http://music.download.com/usdablues/3600-8397_32-100541250.html?tag=MDL_listing_song_artist
lobosan5 on July 28, 2007 at 12:03 PM
Great post Bryan. The MSM has identified their target group and pander to them with as much anti-Bush, anti-American, anti-conservative reporting they can get their hands on. It’s people like you and organizations like HA that create the curb to their advancement into the internet. Throw into the mix the dominance of conservative talk-radio, and we have every reason to be encouraged that our efforts against the lies will not go un-noticed by Americans at home and our brave troops serving abroad.
Keep it up, bro!
csdeven on July 28, 2007 at 12:15 PM
They say you can’t judge a book by it’s cover, but tell me this guy just doesn’t look the part.
- The Cat
MirCat on July 28, 2007 at 12:16 PM
Excellent post, Bryan. Thank you.
– Bill Faith, Proud Viet Nam Vet.
bdfaith on July 28, 2007 at 12:24 PM
Very well said.
This story appears to have been designed to hoodwink the bloggers, first and foremost.
You have done an extraordinary job in hitting them “right between the eyes”
Mcguyver on July 28, 2007 at 12:24 PM
Every time I hear that “I support the troops but not the war” crap I start a slow simmer. Our military goes where our civilian government sends it. They go because it’s their duty and they took an oath saying that they would..duty and honor. They go regardless of the value of the mission or the reasons for it. “Ours is not to reason why.” Every soldier/sailor/marine/airman has at one time or another bitched and moaned about something. That’s normal and expected. What this guy Beauchamp did is not the norm. As others here have pointed out what he did caused more harm than good. There are accepted methods for dealing with situations such as he described and they are very effective. I have no respect for him. Many years ago when I wore a uniform we had fools similar to this. in general they were shunned by their peers and never trusted. Duty and honor, these tools do not understand the first and do not possess the latter. Neither do those who profess “I support the troops but not the war” They are not only tools they are fools.
Oldnuke on July 28, 2007 at 12:37 PM
Very nice commentary, Bryan.
.
Can we say that perhaps Scott Thomas in fact did indeed portray the troops as “babykillers?”
Remember his dialogue (redacted – check the other threads to confirm and MM’s blog):
The sarg points out the little “brown barbarians” and tells LeClaire to “cap them.”
LeClaire asks, “You sure?”
“Dunno.”
This short dialogue is followed by a description of a red sunset-backlit scene of bodies of the kids falling to the ground.
It seems to read that Thomas is saying he watched a commander order his men to shoot kids who are just messing about out on a field, a distance away. That’s murder he describes.
He fudged the delivery so the reader believes it’s a description of an event, then will cry it was fiction, but his smear went out first. Packed with Hard Left vicious stereotypes of soldiers.
naliaka on July 28, 2007 at 12:40 PM
As a member of the US Army, a veteran, and a blogger, thank you for this post. How the military is portrayed from within is, in this conflict, as important as how it is view from without.
Spc Steve on July 28, 2007 at 12:50 PM
Democratic Party, NEA, liberalism, and pubic education. The seeds of the “Great Society” have grown up and it isn’t pretty. You reap what you sow.
Don’t believe me, if you have kids in high school, check out their history or social studies books. And all the draft dodgers from Vietnam War are now the deans of varies universities.
Good essay.
Wuptdo on July 28, 2007 at 12:53 PM
Agreed.
Ryan Gandy on July 28, 2007 at 12:59 PM
I don’t understand the idea that this does not matter. It matters a lot.
It amazing to look back at how it all played out.
Vietnam was the turning point. The Gulf War of 1991 was the first time you saw the mass display of yellow ribbons and “We Support the Troops” banners. Americans had supported the troops in past wars, but probably didn’t have to go to such great lengths to express it because in past wars it was assumed that most Americans supported them. Since Vietnam and the rise the 60′s deGeneration – that cannot be assumed. It is now necessary for pro-military and pro-American Americans to drown out the voices of the Left on an ongoing basis.
But we all knew they itching to get back to their anti-American roots – and now they have. An established magazine that heretofore has represented the responsible left has jumped feet-first into nutroots territory – and that is very significant. I think it is a sign of where they are heading as a movement.
Nosferightu on July 28, 2007 at 1:00 PM
From the perspective of one who hasn’t served (except as…gulp…a reporter), this story matters too. Why? Because, like the whole Ward Churchill debacle, it should have been over and done in three words or less. Academic fraud? You’re fired. Falsification? Run a correction.
I blows that now we have to have a month-long “meta-conversation” about the merits of fake but accurate; i.e., the “facts” may be lies, but let’s discuss the “greater truth” they represent.
No, let’s not.
saint kansas on July 28, 2007 at 1:01 PM
Thank you for your careful, thoughtful reflections. This is just an excellent post, a good piece of writing.
Honor. Truth. Responsibility. Those principles are now viewed negatively as “old-fashioned” and “out-of-date” in our postmodern, narcissism culture.
It is an Honor to be an American citizen, and yet we see how careless USA citizenship is thrown around today.
You are correct, Bryan. In this “postmodern war,” logic and truth are often jettisoned by the wayside, and replaced by lies. Substance is replaced by sound bite and rational discourse is thrown out in favor of meaningless, fictional drama.
“Scott Thomas” was an example of drama. Big time.
ColtsFan on July 28, 2007 at 1:16 PM
I support the mission.
I support the troops.
Except not troops like “Scott Thomas.” If you’re posting “stories from Iraq” on TNR that I disbelieve, I’m googling your fiancee and arguing tanks can’t run over dogs and doing everything I can to expose you and your tall tales. Not on our watch!
e-pirate on July 28, 2007 at 1:23 PM
Professor Blather on July 28, 2007 at 1:25 PM
I’m afraid you would consider me one of those. I am reffered to as those, them, idealist, loon, unhinged, tin-foiled capped lefty, blah blah blah.
I’m one of those who spent time in Afghanistan in ’03, Iraq from 12/03-05/04 (I bailed when things got ugly during the early stages of what looks like a failed occupation). I’m afraid my opinions are tinted by the events I have witnessed. I have witnessed true heroism and courage from our troops and civilian employees alike, and have witnessed bad behavior (you might say unhinged) by the same. My own opinions are based my experiences that are time and place specific.
Yes there are soldiers that are thugs that just want to kill(my former son-in-law is an example) just as there are fine examples (and I would be glad to list hundreds that I have met or worked with). There are also many brave, heroic civilian employees on the ground and many them are what you would term “peaceniks”.
That said, I don’t understand the piling on Scott Thomas that I have read. I don’t understand your outrage over a flat tire on a humvee(seen that), open sewers (are there any other kind in Sadr City).
I could just as well point out falsehoods or inaccuracies in reporting on this blog and those of many of your associates. It is easy to make such mistakes, have ones views altered by an agenda.
It does upset me that people that stand up for peace and non-violence are considered some kind of crazy. Also it would be nice if you just dropped the whole “baby killers- spat upon” rant or please post some evidence. This is considered a fable by most, and most who repeat it were born well after any troop left Nam.
scooter on July 28, 2007 at 1:26 PM
Not sure what happened there. This time without the quote:
Thank you, Bryan. That was good to read.
Professor Blather on July 28, 2007 at 1:26 PM
What I find most odd about this guy is that he volunteered to serve, potentially risking life and limb, for a cause in which he clearly does not believe and in fact planned to criticize all along. He volunteered to undertake this risk essentially to be able to denigrate the war effort and to call anyone who disagrees with his opinion a chickenhawk.
He is risking his life to simply to bolster his arguments once his enlistment is over. He is an immature idiot. His “service” and I use that term lightly does not and never will add credibility to his argument which will be determine by the weight of the facts and the soundness of his opinions.
tommylotto on July 28, 2007 at 1:28 PM
Well said, Sir.
student on July 28, 2007 at 1:30 PM
You are a liar, willing to swallow the leftist propaganda without a moment’s critical thought.
Here you go. Let me know if you still have questions:
Professor Blather on July 28, 2007 at 1:32 PM
And the former prisoners at Dauchau are liars too. Fables.
Nice to know my life has been a bed time story.
Limerick on July 28, 2007 at 1:45 PM
I remember getting frustrated throughout the 80s at how TNR would do the same sort of thing with regard to the Soviet Union and the Cold War; granted, a lot different from actual battle with our guys dying, but alas, still the same sort of backdoor technique with which to pull down the United States, bringing it into a more socialist One World minded view of the world, which sees the peoples of the world as pretty much the same and can’t we all just get along. Of course, the elite at TNR never really ever has to get along with the mass of the rest of us, nor do they want to.
Drum on July 28, 2007 at 1:50 PM
Well have to point out. In veitnam when our troops came back they were villified. But amounst them stood some of their fellow soldiers who stood in the ranks of the anti war and continued the assault on the military
And they were rewarded. John Kerry is a prime example. And Beauchamp is a John Kerry want to be.
The biggest difference now rather than then is we have the blogs to circumvent the mass media that is an ally to the anti war. The blogs have to carry the fight here at home for out troops we sadly some day we may see a senator Beauchamp.
William Amos on July 28, 2007 at 1:51 PM
This immbedded A-hole is sickening. You do know that traditionally many home town military heros went on to enter politics in the years past. The lefts efforts to paint the entire military as evil is a corrosive acid eating away at last bastion of true patiots of the USA. I wonder if Pat Tillman had any political ambitions. We need to realize that patriotism in its purest form is forged from the fires of war. These men are our best and brightest. This misreporting does more than hurt the morale of the troops, it threatens to taint a whole new generation of community leaders.
sonnyspats1 on July 28, 2007 at 1:54 PM
This creep is the new John Kerry.
sonnyspats1 on July 28, 2007 at 1:56 PM
Great insight. It reminds me of one of the least know of Aesop‘s Fables called “The Trumpeter Taken Prisoner”:
(quoted from the Project Gutenberg collection of Aesop’s Fables)
The words of TNR and Scott Beauchamp are like the trumpeter, but with the opposite intent: they discourage and dissuade us from the fight.
J. Max Wilson on July 28, 2007 at 1:59 PM
On the other hand, war is not the greatest evil, and many advocates for war in specific cases are doing far toward attaining peace than the self-righteous (and usually mildly insane) who “stand” for non-violence. Yet they are fobbed off as being war mongers. I know how this works because I do it myself when I become exasperated with the barbarism all round us. Indeed, many of the most incredibly “anti-violent” are the worst animals in morals and manners and are making this world a far worse place than it could be.
Drum on July 28, 2007 at 2:00 PM
I have no problem with anti war types. Its when they turn anti american I have a problem with them.
William Amos on July 28, 2007 at 2:09 PM
Also it would be nice if you just dropped the whole “baby killers- spat upon” rant or please post some evidence. This is considered a fable by most, scooter on July 28, 2007 at 1:26 PM
And the former prisoners at Dauchau are liars too. Fables.
Nice to know my life has been a bed time story.
Limerick on July 28, 2007 at 1:45 PM
Not what I said or would ever imply.
I’m referring to the only quote I have ever found regarding spat upon=baby killer Nam Vets.
“But somebody wouldn’t let us win. I come back and see all these maggots at the airport. Protesting me, spitting, calling me a baby-killer. Who are they to protest me? Huh?”
Unless “Rambo” was a true story, this one shouldn’t count.
scooter on July 28, 2007 at 2:12 PM
Excellent post Bryan.
lowandslow on July 28, 2007 at 2:21 PM
I’ve been in the Military; this Beauchamp guy may write about being the surprise guest at a ‘blanket party’ soon. Meaning that UCMJ is for lawyers, but his mates may dispense a little justice of their own. At the very least he will be a pariah among the troops. And he may end up serving time in military prison, if it can be proven that he has broken military law.
Doug on July 28, 2007 at 2:25 PM
The picture of STB says it all. He looks like he’s posing for the DailyKos or a teen mag. Come to think of it, I’ll bet he’s in love with Markos, his anti-American idol…Whatever, only a narcissistic puke like this wussie idiot would present himself that way or write seditious crap like that.
Christine on July 28, 2007 at 2:27 PM
I was old enough to remember Viet Nam coverage very well. These things did happen and our treatment of our troops was absolutely shameful.
To give you an idea of how our soldiers felt let me relate one story: My Mom volunteered at a church thrift shop where they gave clothes to the poor of our town. Many military guys would donate their uniforms once they left the service – I guess they thought other soldiers could save some money on uniforms, not sure why though, anyway there were numerous medals and decorations turned in with these. My Mom did a little research and found that several people had actually turned in their purple hearts with their dress uniforms. She tried to return them to the owners but it was not easy finding them. I remember how shocked she was that they would do this, when this medal represented being injured in combat and she remembered the WW2 Vets wearing them with pride.
Gulf 1 changed much of that and the soldiers wear them and keep them with pride now. Believe me, our country treated its soldiers like crap then. Even the draft dodgers were given amnesty by Carter at least FIVE YEARS before the Viet Nam memorial was constructed to honor those who didn’t come back.
Bradky on July 28, 2007 at 3:11 PM
The “only” quote you’ve ever seen? Look up half a dozen posts, liar. There’s more than one there.
Here’s more on your lie – on the source – and on the truth:
http://www.nysun.com/article/48084
And here’s where your lie began:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spitting_Image
Although ironically, even the author of your parroted lie admits he’s lying:
“Lembke acknowledged that there likely were some incidents of actual spitting”
In fact, how’s that for a quote? From Lembke himself, proving you wrong? Satisfied yet?
Here’s a few more just to make you look a little more sheep-like:
The only “myth” is that its a myth. You’re twisting reality to fit your ideological blinders, my foolish young friend. Grow up and think for yourself.
Professor Blather on July 28, 2007 at 3:21 PM
This thing purely crap blossomed on the left and has no basis and it was countered first by the Milbloggers calling BS.
It is only one of the whole line of things designed to be a death by a thousand cuts.
We on the right have to expend thousands of hours of energy to bash this BS just to fight it back and this is only one of the many devices being used.
We are in a dog fight and all we are doing is putting up our arms to fend off the attack and might as well be in a fetal position undefended.
That will have costs down the line we will not like to pay.
CommentGuy on July 28, 2007 at 3:32 PM
When fifteen minutes of hammering out stories can invoke thousands of hours effort to counter them it is a war of attrition to wear down the troops.
Or at least divert them from other efforts.
Don’t think for a minute this is an accidental happening, it is a part of a bigger picture of throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks.
CommentGuy on July 28, 2007 at 3:47 PM
Professor Blather,
Good job of hitting with the facts. But the facts won’t change scooters basic assumption.
For example:
Have you heard that scooter has not stopped beating his wife?
For proof, there was word from an unnamed source that he was beating his wife in Chicago last week.
Now scooter, tell us the facts are wrong, that you weren’t in Chicago last week. Or just maybe you could admit that the assertion about beating your wife is wrong wherever you were last week.
I think peace is a noble goal. But in my opinion making false and defamatory assertions and covering them up with fabricated details is not a respectable of communication. And that is just what Scott Thomas Boy Chump did with his stories. (Any disrespect shown toward STB is intentional.)
TunaTalon on July 28, 2007 at 3:48 PM
Well said.
Tim Burton on July 28, 2007 at 4:02 PM
You know I never heard of TNR until I started reading some of the blogs and sites like this. TNR has a readership of 65000 tops (according to wiki).
It is not as dark as you are painting it. Great that people can debunk claims like his quickly, but let’s keep it in perspective.
Bradky on July 28, 2007 at 4:09 PM
Thank you, Brian. When I told my husband (who doesn’t have the time I do to surf the ‘net) about this ‘soldier’ selling out his fellow troops with lies and deceit, he was quite predictably outraged. What the both of us just don’t understand is how 1) Beaucamp made it through basic and 2) how he can reconcile the fact that the same troops he disparages help cover his six under fire.
My husband is still active duty Navy, but I will say we’re lucky in that he hasn’t been called to do his IA tour over there yet (he’s done his cruise to the Gulf, but that’s different). I myself, though, feel shame at my own service, if only because I spent my 4.5 years safely at a desk stateside. I joined for the benefits, and the college money (and to go to language school). I have to say I was quite liberal back then, but being in the Navy taught me enough life lessons that I moved past the brainwashing of my youth. I guess it’s a shame that the same enlightening experience did not visit this fool.
I wonder how he sleeps now that his unit knows him for who he truly is?
the goddess anna on July 28, 2007 at 4:35 PM
Well said Professor Blather. That part of my life is rather dim these days. I tend to dwell more on the more positive memories but sometimes something brings up the other kind. I have some very vivid first hand memories of just such events. Having spent a great deal of time in San Francisco I saw quite a few of them. No condemnation of you but I wouldn’t classify Scooter as a liar. He’s entitled to his opinion and it’s not required that he embrace ours. I don’t care for his either.
If, by now, he doesn’t understand what is so upsetting about the actions of Beauchamp most likely he never will.
Oldnuke on July 28, 2007 at 4:36 PM
Yes he is but there is a difference between an opinion and an outright lie.
EnochCain on July 28, 2007 at 4:54 PM
Why is that different? That’s a dangerous place, just because he’s on a ship doesn’t mean he’s in any less danger. Missiles have long legs and mines are nasty things. Little gunboats are fast and sneaky! And you can’t hide!
Why in the world would you feel shame at your service. You signed up took the oath and did your duty. Instead of saying I spent my time “safely” try saying “I spent my time to ensure the safety of my country and it’s citizens!” Not all service requires loud explosions and bullets. Never be ashamed of your service. Why you joined is irrelevant and your reasons are just fine. You signed you served. Nothing wrong in taking advantage of what’s freely offered and you paid for it. The training I got served me well after I got out, I continued in the same field and used the knowledge I gained from my service to live a fairly comfortable life, put three children through college and retire early. I feel no shame, I paid my dues, so did you.
Oldnuke on July 28, 2007 at 4:59 PM
Who do you think is lying Scooter, Beauchamp or both?
Oldnuke on July 28, 2007 at 5:04 PM
I think they are both full of it.
EnochCain on July 28, 2007 at 5:07 PM
Oldnuke – thank you. I’ve gotten a bit of scuff for being a Russian linguist during the WOT (even though I joined before 9-11).
What this whole thing has taught me: to make sure my kids don’t end up like that Beauchamp idiot!
the goddess anna on July 28, 2007 at 5:13 PM
Professor Blather has granted your request.
I noticed that many of the spitting incidents occurred in Northern California. I’m not a Vietnam vet, but I am retired USAF. When I returned from Berlin in 1989–right before the wall fell–I had occasion to be called a ni**er b*tch while I was wearing my uniform. (The coward sped away.) The location: Northern California, a place in which I experienced more anti-black racism than in all the rest of the places I’ve ever been combined (including the New South). Then, as now, NoCal is a hotbed of hatred.
baldilocks on July 28, 2007 at 5:17 PM
I didn’t notice until now that scooter said that he went to military language school (DLI, Presidio of Monterey, CA). So did I. I was attending DLI for intermediate German when the above incident occurred.
baldilocks on July 28, 2007 at 5:20 PM
correction: the goddess anna
baldilocks on July 28, 2007 at 5:22 PM
Full of it, yeah I’d buy that but wouldn’t go so far as to call Scooter a liar. From his post seemed to me he was just stating an opinion. We may feel it’s misguided, off track whatever but I didn’t see anything I could classify as a lie. Beauchamp, another story. A lot of his ramblings were just juvenile and like most everyone else I saw a lot that of stuff whose credibility I doubt.
Oldnuke on July 28, 2007 at 5:23 PM
Would you accept willfully ignorant? There is no excuse for a HotAir commenter to not know this stuff.
TBinSTL on July 28, 2007 at 5:52 PM
Я изучал русский язык
But never served
Also
Ich spreche etwas Deutsches
But been too long since I had a class in either language.
But according to the left all military (and their supporters) are uneducated losers. Go figure
William Amos on July 28, 2007 at 5:53 PM
Other than the crying about hurt feelings, my major concern is that this is going to lead to a crack down on legitimate milblogs by those that don’t understand the medium, in and out of the service. How long until the first MSNBC spacial about bloggers endangering the troops, mission etc. It’s a perfect set up for them to quash the most reliable source we have besides the independent embeds like Yon and there are not enough of them.
TBinSTL on July 28, 2007 at 5:57 PM
fixed it…
Guys, we don’t actually have to refute every little detail of the lies, damned lies, and statistics put forth by the anti-war left publications. There’s a little thing called credibility. TNR has none. They are traitors who hide behind the First Amendment to protext their “right” to commit treason. Once you demonstrate (by random sampling) that they have published distortions, half-truths, lies, and complete fabrications, then it is incumbent on them to prove they are credible.
An exercise like this is certainly worthwhile since they probably haven’t been spanked in a while, and thus need some attention (actually, this is probably the reason for their current tantrum). But there’s no need to waste all our time refuting every word of their “publication” since we have sufficient evidence that they are the leftist rag we all know them to be. Their readers know this, too, and are simply looking for an outlet for their anti-American, anti-military, (ultimately) suicidal fantasies.
urbancenturion on July 28, 2007 at 6:11 PM
Scooter sounds like one of those fools who thinks feelings are more important than facts. Damn reality, I’s knows whats I’s knows. Facts only confuse him. If it doesn’t fit the “meta-narrative” it slides into the memory hole. Same as Boy Chump, same as Jessie “Ranger” MacBeth, same as John “Jengis Khan” Kerry.
ticticboom on July 28, 2007 at 6:13 PM
A great thing we have today are forums like this one. When something is dumped out there for all to see fact checking starts immediately. Rathergate, Jesse MacBeth others too numerous to mention. If you put out a load of crap you’ll soon find out just how much it stinks…and so will the rest of the world. Politicians are being held to account more than I’ve ever seen, news outlets can no longer spew lies with impunity. Things “They are a changin’” For the better, I believe.
Oldnuke on July 28, 2007 at 6:22 PM
Excellent essay, Bryan.
Or am I allowed to even have an opinion since Inever served?! :0
Bob's Kid on July 28, 2007 at 6:32 PM
Happened to my late husband, several times getting off the boat in Long Beach. Made him very bitter, and I wish that he’d lived long enough to see the Vietnam vets get the honor they deserve.
Bob's Kid on July 28, 2007 at 6:41 PM
Bryan, I think I get it as much as a civilian can. That’s why I went so aggro picking apart Beauchamp’s blog when you posted it.
Bad Candy on July 28, 2007 at 6:53 PM
I’m glad to see the NYT acknowledge TNR’s ghostboy was dispatching “deeply critical accounts” and not mere “discreet views” from Iraq.
There’s little doubt about the purpose. Now that Foer rushed to have his ghostboy “reveal[ed] his identity” hours after it was annouced that it would be exposed and shortly before the appointed hour, the media can paint everything connected to Beauchamp as credible and can drop their innocuous “discreet view” marketing campaign for their real one.
Armed with their broad paint brushes, the NYT quickly draws the first element of the left’s collage — “CHICKENHAWKS!1!??11″
Next? Grotesque incidents by the military!!!
Next? Persecution!!!
Writers at the Times can write like this in their sleep. The question is, did the NYT request the interview or did TNR? (That’s a rhetorical question, moonbats, and not indicative of my belief that Foer asked the NYT’s to write it.)
Dusty on July 28, 2007 at 6:58 PM
Hey Bryan!
Get a load of this from Paul McCleary at the Columbia Journalism Review (via Weelky Standard Blog):
It didn’t register on this genius that milblogs=military blogs.
baldilocks on July 28, 2007 at 7:00 PM
Heh. That’s a little like Foer asking if a woman could even be on a FOB. If these people had the first clue about any of this, they could avoid these easy mistakes.
Bryan on July 28, 2007 at 7:07 PM
Hey, McCleary also points out that Beauchamp is a college grad. Wonder how he got stuk in Irak? Maybe he dint do so gud in skule. Where’s Jon Karry when he’s needed?
Oldnuke on July 28, 2007 at 7:10 PM
Has anyone asked Scott why he wanted to betray his fellow soldiers?
Or slander the military, during a war, from within the ranks?
Why not get a discharge for “incompatability” (or whatever the current easy-out is) and speak his mind from a civilian position?
Why demoralize and undermine those who risk their lives for his?
The only way I’d want him in my foxhole was inside a sandbag.
profitsbeard on July 28, 2007 at 7:14 PM
I’m sure someone is asking him that very thing on a daily basis.
The only one he’s demoralizing is himself and, hey it was a short trip anyway. He’s probably been depressed since Howard Dean lost his presidential bid….YeeeeeHaaa.
Oldnuke on July 28, 2007 at 7:21 PM
I honor Beauchamps service. Im sure I want more honors of KP duty and latrine duty for him.
yes sir more please sir I love it sir !
William Amos on July 28, 2007 at 7:33 PM
The liberals can’t even keep their arguments straight. They say that Private Buttchomp is a noble individual who is serving his country, yet in order for his integrity to be intact, he must be telling the truth. But if that is true, then this is a person who openly mocks the disabled.
They admire and defend this person? The Right is far more generous toward this cretin in believing that he is a liar.
Nosferightu on July 28, 2007 at 7:37 PM
Oldnuke-
I didn’t mean he was succeeding in demoralizing his fellow soldiers, but I wondered why he even wanted to try.
I suspect its an infantile-ego-mixed-with-delusions-of-talent gone wild, with some unresolved gender-identity issues at play.
(I don’t think he understands the fight we’re in or the enemy we face, and is probably invigorated by his quisling behavior, not demoralized.)
profitsbeard on July 28, 2007 at 7:40 PM
It IS about truth, Bryan, and also about the collapsing hold that the no-longer-elite ‘media’ no longer has on culture and on intellectual life in America.
This de-frocking of TNR and Surreal Private Beauchamp will further decrease the authority and credibility that these people have. With their readership rapidly shrinking, the last few shreds of authority that they have from the Good Old Leftie Days are all they have–and those last few threads need to be exposed for the fraud they are.
TNR and the other Usual Suspects are not going to go down easy: the attacks on blogs and the attempts to revive the Unfairness Doctrine are clear indications of who these people are and the means they’ll use to cling to what they have
You and MM are right: this is a VERY BIG deal……..
Janos Hunyadi on July 28, 2007 at 7:42 PM
Gee, “scooter” showed up, spouted some doctrinaire leftist dogma, ASKE THE HOST NOT TO SAY THINGS based on that dogma, and then, when b****-slapped back into place with a torrent of facts, disappeared.
There’s a word for that.
Unfortunately, this may really be a case of ignorant people who believe urban legends – which are damned hard to get rid of, especially when the (spit) MSM keeps carrying water for them (TANG, “no spitting,” etc.).
I strongly believe in the free press. I’m not sure how much difference it makes at this point in time, given that 80% of what it carries are press releases and 15% straight-out lies.
Merovign on July 28, 2007 at 7:44 PM
While we’re on the subject of chickenhawks, I take it that liberals believe that people who are born with disabilities that preclude then from taking part in military service as adults are forbidden from ever advocating military action.
Also, I guess a larger percentage of men than women are allowed to advocate military action based on the percentages who serve in the military.
Leftists always expanding the horizons of equality, aren’t they. Bastards.
Nosferightu on July 28, 2007 at 7:46 PM
profitsbeard
Dang! What you said! I’d just have said he’s an ignorant twit only interested in his own self serving agenda. I like your description better.
I agree that he doesn’t understand the enemy we’re up against. Unfortunately I think the vast majority of people don’t understand who or what that enemy is. Case in point the tools who just arrested the guy for flushing a Koran down the drain. You can bet they don’t understand. Neither does most of our government.
Oldnuke on July 28, 2007 at 8:09 PM
Only when it works for them! :D
Ryan Gandy on July 28, 2007 at 8:12 PM
Ah a little nugget of understanding. I love it.
Yes good HA folk, it took a lot of creative detective work and diligence bordering on obsession but now HA has credibility and TNR has lost it.
Once credibility has been lost, words, no matter how well crafted. don’t count.
Once you have credibility, what you say matters even if the grammar is less than perfect.
What Hot Air says now counts more in the public discourse than TNR. Except of course for this post.
TunaTalon on July 28, 2007 at 9:49 PM
Nice post. Thank You Brian
xplodeit on July 28, 2007 at 10:28 PM
Changing a political mindset, especially going from Left to Right, is a humbling experience. Many would rather die than admit that they are following a false ideology.
Islamist jihadists not only want to kill us (unbelievers), but they ARE killing us. If this Beauchamp was alone in a room with a jihadist trying to kill him…do you think he might have a political epiphany and decide that maybe our fight is a noble one?
Doug on July 29, 2007 at 12:32 AM
The more I read about this guy the more I just wish I could shout at him right in his ear son life is something that you take part in and don’t just sit on the sidelines with.
I have been following this guy and the closest friends of him down and if you read their words and their life views they are a vacant bunch of nothing that are only taking up space.
A simple concentrated group of life wasters who realize their role and don’t know who to shoot at besides themselves in revenge.
CommentGuy on July 29, 2007 at 3:35 AM
Bryan: “It was routine during World War II, for instance, to capture enemy soldiers, extract information from them, and then shoot them because the advancing US troops had no way to keep them. Gitmo was nearly unthinkable,…”
Bryan, you’re overstating the case. Our guys in WWII did shoot prisoners on occassion, but it wasn’t routine. There is the well-known example of Lt Spears gunning down prisoners during the Normandy invasion shown in “Band of Brothers.” Ernie Pyle wrote an unfiled column about a hard fight where GIs took casualties then rounded up the German hostages and executed them. There is an incident where GIs at a concentration camp began machine-gunning the captive SS guards. Patton tore up their court martial papers and threw them in the trash.
However, our military took lots of German prisoners. Many of them were shipped back on troop ships to POW camps in America, Texas and New Mexico included. They fared well in the camps, some of them returning after the war to become citizens.
Execution of prisoners was worse in the Pacific after our Marines discovered how the Japanese treated prisoners. However, I wouldn’t call execution of Japanese prisoners routine because so few surrendered.
Tantor on July 29, 2007 at 6:46 PM
That said, Bryan, you are right that we must debunk Beauchamp’s dubious story. If not disproven now, it will become legitimate with time, just like all the phony stories Kerrey manufactured in the Winter Soldier protest. Like Lenin says, a lie told often enough becomes the truth.
Tantor on July 29, 2007 at 6:49 PM
I just got two words for everybody on here. Amorita Randall.
SoulGlo on July 29, 2007 at 7:33 PM
Patton was wrong to do that. Everyone deserves a fair trial. Here is an extract from an article by Kevin Myers:
aengus on July 29, 2007 at 9:00 PM
Off topic: Is there a reason I can’t log on to the Quran thread?
Lancer on July 29, 2007 at 11:24 PM
I can’t believe Scooter never even came back.
I’m really getting tired of liberal trolls who rely on dishonest statements and then – when called on their dishonesty – never have the integrity to address their untruths.
As I was just saying in another thread, opposing views are a welcome addition here; they’re crucial, in fact.
But I don’t understand why the clear lies are allowed to continue.
Professor Blather on July 30, 2007 at 9:05 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »