Gothamist: Jason Christopher Hartley, Soldier

matty

Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:59:17 -0500

Great inteview. However, why can we comment on this interview but not any quasi-celebrity interviews?

HowBoutDemCowboys

Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:05:51 -0500

The one thing people seem to be missing here is the fact that this guy is in the National Guard. THE NATIONAL GUARD! Or to put it in layman's terms so that everyone can understand, they GUARD our NATION. That means they should be here, in the United States, on standby, in case anyone invades or some other such disaster occurs within our borders.

MissPinkKate

Tue, 18 Mar 2008 11:25:14 -0500

I guess if I could choose one smaller thing it would be the whole anti-gay thing. That crap’s retarded. I support the sentiment, but LOL at the word choice....

Bottomless Chips

Tue, 18 Mar 2008 11:18:25 -0500

I wouldn't take the observations of ONE National Guard enlisted soldier too seriously. This guy wasn't a general or even an officer, he was a regular troop with a blog. As such, while he is certainly capable of commenting on his own observations of the day to day experience, he wouldn't have any special insight into policy or the merits of being in Iraq or Afghanistan. It's just nice to hear someone else's perspective. I'm sure there's someone else, another private, who wants to stay for the next 100 years. Anyone can have an opinion on foreign policy.

eyekantspel

Tue, 18 Mar 2008 11:16:48 -0500

Lest my comment be mistaken for knocking this guy, I'm not. His blog is an interesting read on a National Guard member's experience, is pretty well-written, interesting pictures, etc.

eyekantspel

Tue, 18 Mar 2008 10:57:48 -0500

sinisterteashop

Tue, 18 Mar 2008 10:51:18 -0500

And many think the Iraqi death toll is much higher than 80M. ORB (Opinion Research Business), an independent polling agency located in London, puts the total war casualties at 1.2 million.

Bottomless Chips

Tue, 18 Mar 2008 10:39:04 -0500

Interesting interview. A couple of points, I believe "only" 4,950ish soldiers have died, and the war has cost much more than $600B at present costs while it will eventually cost $3+ trillion. And many think the Iraqi death toll is much higher than 80M. Anyway, what I found most interesting was his allusion to how corrupt soldiers become from war. To me, that's the saddest part. Because a few individuals believed in the Wolfowitz doctrine and the WHIG became our war deciders instead of Congress (our elected officials after all), they've given the death orders of thousands of people, ruined the lives of vets who will become homeless, maimed thousands of our men and women...and all for nothing. In fact, it's been counterproductive. History has shown that killing leaders is what led to 9/11, it led to preventing nations from achieving what we set out to do (ha!): achieve democracy. c.f. Korea, Vietnam Many generals dead and alive espoused views contradictory to our current president: no big standing armies, because you are more apt to carelessly put them into unnecessary wars.