MSNBC and Col. Jack Jacobs~this is day 2 that he's been

[babylonsister]

bloviating about the British soldiers who were held in Iran. To hear him speak, anything less than certain death on the part of the British is unacceptable. He bemoans the fact that they didn't prostrate themselves for the sake of their country. Now he's going on about gifts received, and - gasp! - the commericial airline that flew them home vs. a military carrier. All the while, he's fat, dumb, happy, and clueless sitting in a studio. I think all pundits should be forced to walk a mile in the soldiers' boots before being so critical. He's really supercilious and annoying.
:rant:

[bigtree]

1. I thought he was amazingly insulting

I wonder how the Brit citizens will receive their servicefolks?

[BlueManDude]

2. I'm sure he was asked to come back and reprieve his bullshit from yesterday

No doubt he's making quite a few fans out there in "Couch Potato Cowboy" land.

[Eurobabe]

3. I heard him, what a condescending ASSHOLE

:wtf:

[atreides1]

4. Well

In Jacobs defense, he has walked that mile during Vietnam.

I disagree with his stand on this and his insistance about what he would have done, because until you're in that situation you never know how you'll react.


Medal of Honor citation
For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty. Capt. Jacobs (then 1st Lt.), Infantry, distinguished himself while serving as assistant battalion advisor, 2d Battalion, 16th Infantry, 9th Infantry Division, Army of the Republic of Vietnam. The 2d Battalion was advancing to contact when it came under intense heavy machine gun and mortar fire from a Viet Cong battalion positioned in well fortified bunkers. As the 2d Battalion deployed into attack formation its advance was halted by devastating fire. Capt. Jacobs, with the command element of the lead company, called for and directed air strikes on the enemy positions to facilitate a renewed attack. Due to the intensity of the enemy fire and heavy casualties to the command group, including the company commander, the attack stopped and the friendly troops became disorganized. Although wounded by mortar fragments, Capt. Jacobs assumed command of the allied company, ordered a withdrawal from the exposed position and established a defensive perimeter. Despite profuse bleeding from head wounds which impaired his vision, Capt. Jacobs, with complete disregard for his safety, returned under intense fire to evacuate a seriously wounded advisor to the safety of a wooded area where he administered lifesaving first aid. He then returned through heavy automatic weapons fire to evacuate the wounded company commander. Capt. Jacobs made repeated trips across the fire-swept open rice paddies evacuating wounded and their weapons. On 3 separate occasions, Capt. Jacobs contacted and drove off Viet Cong squads who were searching for allied wounded and weapons, single-handedly killing 3 and wounding several others. His gallant actions and extraordinary heroism saved the lives of 1 U.S. advisor and 13 allied soldiers. Through his effort the allied company was restored to an effective fighting unit and prevented defeat of the friendly forces by a strong and determined enemy. Capt. Jacobs, by his gallantry and bravery in action in the highest traditions of the military service, has reflected great credit upon himself, his unit, and the U.S. Army.

[rfranklin]

5. That was in the days when they handed out medals like...

party favors. Even John Kerry got a bunch of medals!

[TahitiNut]

11. Nonsense.

It's easy to talk ... try doing it.

[trumad]

12. SNIF

[H2O Man]

9. Right.

I respect the guy. I might not agree with him on this. But he is not "fat, dumb, and happy." He is an intelligent, focused individual who reaches his conclusions based upon his many years experience. Again, while I do not agree with him on many issues, I think he has earned respect, and is worth listening to.

[babylonsister]

16. OK, so maybe 'fat, dumb, and happy' was over the line, but

when he claims these soldiers were a 'disgrace, provided a shoddy spectacle, should have resisted', etc., while admitting he's not even aware of how the Brits run their military or if their code of conduct is similar to ours, I find his opinions not so valuable. He's so critical but hasn't even bothered to research the discrepancies he sees.
And I just don't know what resisting would have accomplished.

[H2O Man]

23. That raises an important point.

Actually, the OP did, also. Rather than make his view in and of itself the issue, perhaps a more important one is: why the heck does every cable channel have a half-dozen retired military experts providing their insights to the public? Why the lack of balance -- for there are no voices of pacifism on any of them on a regular basis. I think it is proper to interview people from a military background for stories regarding US military matters. But I am not in favor of making all cable channels the voice of the military. That is something I would advocate that we resist.

[babylonsister]

25. Very good point, H20 Man, thanks. We need some balance! nt

[TahitiNut]

18. His perspectives are all embedded in a paradigm of WAR.

He's talking as though Iran and Britain are at war. While I applaud (and am in awe of) his actions in Viet Nam, Jack is far more embedded in the paradigm of warfare in all his pronouncements than I feel is healthy - mentally. While he COULD be far more aware of the various international laws regarding members of the military in other countries, he's apparently either ignorant or deliberately ignoring such long-standing laws. Indeed, it has long been considered and Act of War for the military of one nation to interdict commerce involving another nation. (We should know this from the Cuban Missile Crisis.)

Furthermore, his EVERY pronouncement on the illegal occupation of Iraq is prefaced by the meme of the "Iraq War" (which it is NOT). Armed hostilities do NOT constitute 'war.' Armed insurrection does NOT make the US a legal combatant.

Jack, I'm afraid, has been willingly exploited (cashed in) regarding his status as a MoH holder.

[H2O Man]

24. I agree 100%

that he views everything within the context of "war." It's funny, 40 and 50 years ago, the intelligence community worked to place a couple folks in most newsrooms on the sly. Today, the corporate media is saturated with "analysts" who spoon-feed the public a viewpoint that is entirely from the military context.

[Rydz777]

15. Good reminder

I give him a pass based on the fact that he actually put himself at risk. The ones I despise are the chickenhawks like the neocon Bill Kristol who never served and who are always so eager to "send in more troops," i.e. other peoples' children.

[bluedog]

6. he said he would have fought......

and would have died.........He called the Brits stupid.......that they didn't do more....they had their side arms.....

This man is a brave talker............I see he just loves this shit!!!!


I have a question for him......how come McCain didn't suicide himself when captured.....after all we were at war with VietNam.............We are not at war with Iran........

[leftofthedial]

13. they didn't start the war that he and his ilk want so much

he lost his killing nut and now his war balls are blue

[No DUplicitous DUpe]

17. I thought his take on this matter was really bizarre?

He really made no sense whatsoever. Unless there is glory in being dead.

[Lint Head]

7. These soldiers are pawns.

Jacobs is a nitwit. War is Neanderthal. The entire mindset of fighting fire with fire is antiquated. Of course you would defend yourself if attacked but you do not exacerbate military situation that is not volatile. :dem:

[librechik]

8. fucking whack job--exemplifies everything WRONG about military service!

Join the Army and be a blithering idiot!

[BlueManDude]

10. Bottom line - there are some poeple who are disappointed that this didn't start WWIII

[muriel_volestrangler]

14. Jacobs was in a war with Vietnam; Britain isn't at war with Iran

which seems to be what Jacobs, and others talking like him, are disregarding. While Iran may not be 'friendly', it's not 'the enemy' either, so firing their weapons would have been a last resort for the sailors. There may be legitimate criticism of the alertness of the sailors and marines both in the RIBs and on the main ship - perhaps they should have been able to avoid meeting the Iranians, or turned it into an equally-armed standoff where no-one fired. I think they'll have at least an internal inquiry into this.

What's he said about a commercial carrier v. a military plane, I don't know, but it sounds as if he's not thinking. Iran just wouldn't give permission for a British military plane to land and take away the sailors; it's not a choice the British would have had. I suppose they could have been flown by some other country's airline to a third country, and then taken on by a military plane, but that seems pointless to me. The British military did pick them up at Heathrow, rather than having a celebrity-style landing and exit through customs there, so they're trying to keep this as military as possible.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

19. Thank you.........

Finally an answer that does not denigrate Col Jacobs service, but calls his comments into question.

The fact is that we don't know the full story of these soldier's captivity. Maybe they consented to playing the submissive, apologetic role to prevent a dangerous escalation of an already bad situation in that part of the world, or maybe they were coerced. We dont know.

While I somewhat agree with Col. Jacobs in that is curious that these folks were out patrolling w/ no apparent air or naval support, it remains we don't know all the details of what exactly happened and what the buildup was. I'm hoping as time passes, the abduction time-line and details of their captive treatment will become more apparent, then the time for Monday-morning quarterbacking can commence. I feel that comments I have heard in the media, from Col Jacobs as well as others, are premature.

Just my $0.02

[Kinkistyle]

20. Lets put the shoe on other foot.

If U.S. Coast Guard had captured a group of foreign soldiers near or possibly in our waters, would the ideal scenario for us be that these prisoners used super ninja soldier tactics to resist and kill a good dozen or so Coast Guard officers, blowing up some vehicles and maybe some innocent bystanders before suiciding themselves in one final valiant act of patriotism? Heck maybe we can give them some medals for being so brave and heroic.

He is also making fun of the Ahmadinejad for being so kind to the Britons by offering them pizza, gifts, joking around and generally being an amicable guy. I guess the APPROPRIATE outcome should have been for him to have isolated them, tortured them and treated them like dogs.

What a load of B.S. Whatever happened to the country that managed to sway our enemies to our side by treating our prisoners with respect and kindness.

[gatorboy]

21. So I guess he thinks McCain's a coward for being taken alive as a POW?

[KoKo]

22. He's STILL at It? Who is paying him besides MSNBC....sheesh..

He was bad enough yesterday. Like he was reading from TP's prepared by the NeoCons.