Speaks for itself.

Frequent tours for U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan have stressed the all-volunteer force and made it worth considering a return to a military draft, President Bush’s new war adviser said Friday.

“I think it makes sense to certainly consider it,” Army Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute said in an interview with National Public Radio’s “All Things Considered.”

“And I can tell you, this has always been an option on the table. But ultimately, this is a policy matter between meeting the demands for the nation’s security by one means or another,” Lute added in his first interview since he was confirmed by the Senate in June.

President Nixon abolished the draft in 1973. Restoring it, Lute said, would be a “major policy shift” and Bush has made it clear that he doesn’t think it’s necessary.

The president’s position is that the all volunteer military meets the needs of the country and there is no discussion of a draft. General Lute made that point as well,” National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe said.

In the interview, Lute also said that “Today, the current means of the all-volunteer force is serving us exceptionally well.”

Still, he said the repeated deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan affect not only the troops but their families, who can influence whether a service member decides to stay in the military.

“There’s both a personal dimension of this, where this kind of stress plays out across dinner tables and in living room conversations within these families,” he said. “And ultimately, the health of the all-volunteer force is going to rest on those sorts of personal family decisions.”

The military conducted a draft during the Civil War and both world wars and between 1948 and 1973. The Selective Service System, re-established in 1980, maintains a registry of 18-year-old men.

Story

This is an awful hard subject for me. I just don’t understand how you can charge someone with murder that is fighting a war.

A US general has dismissed all charges against two marines accused in the killing of 24 Iraqi civilians in Haditha, including women and children, the Marine Corp said yesterday.
Lance Corporal Justin Sharratt, 22, was charged with murdering three brothers. Captain Randy Stone, 35, a battalion lawyer, was charged with failing to adequately report and investigate the November 19 2005 incident.

The episode is seen as potentially one of the gravest abuses by US forces in the Iraq war. The dead included elderly people, women and children as young as three and one. Several of the victims were killed in their beds.

In dropping the charges, Lieutenant General James Mattis, the general with jurisdiction in the case, said he was sympathetic to the challenges marines face in Iraq.

“Where the enemy disregards any attempt to comply with ethical norms of warfare, we exercise discipline and restraint to protect the innocent caught on the battlefield,” Gen Mattis wrote in his letter to Corp Sharratt.

The decision to drop the charges against the two marines followed earlier recommendations by investigating officers who listened to the evidence against them, though it was recommended that Capt Stone face an administrative hearing.

Four enlisted marines were initially charged with murder, and four officers were charged with failing to investigate the episode. Prosecutors dropped charges against one of the enlisted men, Sergeant Sanick Dela Cruz, and gave him immunity to testify against his squad mates.

The central figure in the case remains squad leader Staff Sergeant Frank Wuterich, who faces 18 counts of murder and is scheduled to attend a preliminary hearing later this month.

The other enlisted marine, Lance Corporal Stephen Tatum, has attended a preliminary hearing but no recommendation has been made about whether he should stand trial for murder.

Story

Ya right. I don’t know about you but this guy reminds me of a shyster.

Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney on Wednesday defended his five sons’ decision not to enlist in the military, saying they’re showing their support for the country by “helping me get elected.”

Romney, who did not serve in Vietnam due to his Mormon missionary work and a high draft lottery number, was asked the question by an anti-war activist after a speech in which he called for “a surge of support” for U.S. forces in Iraq.

Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, also saluted a uniformed soldier in the crowd and called for donations to military support organizations. Last week, he donated $25,000 to seven such organizations.

“The good news is that we have a volunteer Army and that’s the way we’re going to keep it,” Romney told some 200 people gathered in an abbey near the Mississippi River that had been converted into a hotel. “My sons are all adults and they’ve made decisions about their careers and they’ve chosen not to serve in the military and active duty and I respect their decision in that regard.”

He added: “One of the ways my sons are showing support for our nation is helping me get elected because they think I’d be a great president.”

Romney’s five sons range in age from 37 to 26 and have worked as real estate developers, sports marketers and advertising executives. They are now actively campaigning for their father and have a “Five Brothers” blog on Romney’s campaign Web site.

Romney noted that his middle son, 36-year-old Josh, was completing a recreational vehicle tour of all 99 Iowa counties on Wednesday and said, “I respect that and respect all those and the way they serve this great country.”

The woman who asked the question, Rachel Griffiths, 41, of Milan, Ill., identified herself as a member of Quad City Progressive Action for the Common Good, as well as the sister of an Army major who had served in Iraq.

Story

Speaks for itself.

Adm. Michael G. Mullen, President Bush’s nominee to head the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Senate panel yesterday that the war in Iraq is taking a heavy toll on the U.S. military, warning that American forces are “not unbreakable” and stressing the need to “plan for an eventual drawdown” of troops.

Appearing in a confirmation hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Mullen, 60, acknowledged that the increase in U.S. forces cannot continue past April 2008 under the military’s current force structure. He also cautioned that Iraqi political reconciliation is not keeping pace with security improvements.

Unless the Iraqi government takes advantage of the “breathing space” that U.S. forces are providing, Mullen said, “no amount of troops in no amount of time will make much of a difference.”

Testifying alongside Mullen was Marine Gen. James E. Cartwright, 57, the nominee to become vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs. He heads the U.S. Strategic Command.

In written responses to committee questions, Mullen warned that “there is no purely military solution in Iraq” and that the country’s politicians “need to view politics and democracy as more than just majority rule, winner-take-all, or a zero-sum game.” Absent that, he said, the United States will be forced to reevaluate its strategy.

Story

Yesterday in Washington, we had a slumber party in the Senate, Code Pink in the parking lot at Capitol Hill and anti war activists meeting with US Senators. I know because I endured endless stories about the first and a few stories about the second and third.

But somehow, the importance of the Vets For Freedom meeting with Senators and attending a press conference was not to be found.

Vets for Freedom expresses disappointment that veterans were not able to meet with Congressional leadership from both sides of the aisle in Congress today. While many Republican Senators, including leadership, made themselves available for questions and input, interaction from Democratic leadership was noticeably absent. In spite of that, Vets for Freedom members remain committed to speaking with elected leaders on both sides of the aisle.

This trip had been planned in advance of Senator Reid announcing his all nighter, so I find no excuse for leadership on either side to not make time for this group of veterans. There’s more.

I was thankful that Power Line was able to secure a copy of Lt. Hegseth’s remarks at the actual press conference. I will only post his final two paragraphs.

So what we do in Iraq and in the Senate chamber tonight and in the weeks to come will reverberate for generations. But you’re not going to have to stay up all night to figure out what leaving before the job is done does. It weakens American interests, it emboldens America’s enemies and it would leave behind one heck of a bloodbath for Abdul Kattar and millions of Iraqis.

So the vets standing here behind me, I’m proud to say, understand this firsthand. We lived it. We breathed it. Our buddies died for it. And we ask Congress to stand with us, just as these senators are standing with us today, and stand with the troops in Iraq.

Read further and find the reaction of the press to this group of Veterans. If Code Pink makes for better press..to me we really are headed in the “wrong direction.”

Sergeant Nichols at Jack Army links to a website which might help veterans of the US military secure employment.

The statistics he posts are a bit grim for those who serve our country with honor.

The people who are returning from our Global War on Terror are not finding appropriate civilian employment. Nationally, veterans 20 to 24 years old, have a much higher unemployment rate than non-veterans of the same age group. In August of 2005, veterans had an unemployment rate of 15.6% compared to their non-veteran counterparts who had an unemployment rate of 8.7%. US Dept. of Labor Release

If you know of a veteran in need of a job, or you are a veteran seeking employment, check out “Hire a Hero”..it might help.

On a sidenote, thanks Sergeant Nichols for adding us to your blogroll. May you and those serving with you know you are remembered daily in the prayers of many.

You’ve got to admire the man for his, I don’t care what you think, attitude.

President Bush pushed back Tuesday against demands from Republican lawmakers to outline a new war strategy, urging them to hold their fire until Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, delivers a progress report in September.

Bush told a friendly audience here that the additional troops he ordered to Iraq have only recently arrived to join the fight. “I believe that it’s in this nation’s interests to give the commander a chance to fully implement his operations. And I believe Congress ought to wait for General Petraeus to come back and give us an assessment of the strategy that he’s putting in place before they make any decisions,” Bush said at a town hall appearance.

Story

Yesterday, Talk of the Nation’s Neal Conan interviewed three vets about their views on how election politics are playing out among the troops. Listen here, or read their columns in this Washington Monthly edition.

This video stirred emotions in me which had been dormant for a very long time. It reminded me of a time (and I was one of these kids) when another war became unpopular in this country due to politics and how our returning military members were treated.

From the site which posted and composed the video these words were so touching:

The inspiration for this video comes from the Family Support Group for the unit I supported while I was a recruiter. I finally saw first hand how it isn’t only the soldier who sacrifices for this country. I saw how sometimes the world forgets how much the children of our Armed Service Members really sacrifice.

This video is for the kids… it’s for every concert or soccer game their parent miss. It’s for every band or choir concert their parents watch on video thousands of miles away. This video is for how much we really love our kids - and why sometimes mommy and daddy have to be away. Its because we don’t leave because we don’t love our kids - it’s because we leave BECAUSE we love our kids.

I hope for these children when their Moms and Dads return from Iraq or Afghanistan the people in this country will swell with pride and thank them for their service.

To every military family out there, know that there are prayers said and thoughts of you each day. Know there are those here who do understand your mission and support you and your families without fail. Washington may control policy but they will never control the hearts of those who care.

Note: If you cannot see the video on this post or are having trouble viewing it please go here and view.

Army Reserve Chaplain Higgins shares an experience he witnessed while stationed in Balad, Iraq. As I read, I felt the pride I often do when one writes about our brave young men and women in the US Military.

I recently attended a showing of “Spiderman 3″ here at LSA Anaconda. We have a large auditorioum we use for movies as well as memorial services and other large gatherings. As is the custom back in the States, we stood and snapped to attention when the National Anthem began before the main feature. All was going as planned until about three-quarters of the way through the National Anthem the music stopped.

Please read the complete story. It is relatively short but speaks volumes.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid must have shaken his head so hard something is rattling inside that is making him seem stupid!

According to Politico Reid has declared Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Pace, and the leader of the troops in Iraq, General Petraeus, a man he voted to confirm in January, “incompetent”.

Are we seeing a common thread here? Everyone, according to the Democrats is “incompetent”.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid called Marine Gen. Peter Pace, the outgoing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, “incompetent” during an interview Tuesday with a group of liberal bloggers, a comment that was never reported.

Reid made similar disparaging remarks about Army Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said several sources familiar with the interview.

This is but the latest example of how Reid, under pressure from liberal activists to do more to stop the war, is going on the attack against President Bush and his military leaders in anticipation of a September showdown to end U.S. involvement in Iraq, according to Democratic senators and aides.

Reid, who was bashed by Republicans for suggesting earlier this year that the Iraq war was “lost,” is lashing out at top commanders while putting the finishing touches on a plan to force a series of votes on Iraq designed exclusively to make Republicans up for reelection in 2008 go on record in favor of continuing an unpopular war.

Reid, the senators and aides said, does not expect any of the Iraq measures to pass but hopes the effort will drive a deep enough wedge between wavering Republicans and Bush that, by September, Republican senators will break with the president and help end the war.[Emphasis mine. Admin.]

Vote and vote and vote again

“We want them to vote and vote and vote again” on Iraq, said a senior Democratic senator, speaking on the condition of anonymity in order to discuss party strategy. “They are going to have to vote on Iraq until they are sick of it.”

The tougher-talking Reid is taking a decidedly harder line on Iraq at a time when anti-war activists are stepping up their criticism of Democratic leaders for not forcing a quick end to the conflict in Iraq.

Besides his comments about Pace and Petraeus, the Nevada Democrat also announced that he wants to hold more votes on ending or scaling back the U.S. military presence in Iraq.

Reid should know all about incompetence since he hasn’t been able to accomplish anything in this Congress except tear the country apart more than it was.

How many days and how many tries did it take him and his partner Nancy Pelosi to pass a supplemental spending bill that would not have withdrawal dates in it, knowing withdrawal dates would bring about a veto? If you said 108 you’d be right.

One bill took 108 days to finally be acceptable! Oh, and he supports our troops. Just not the generals who lead them.

Mr. Reid, if these generals are incompetent, then I have one thing to say to you: Pot meet kettle.

Little wonder his approval rating is somewhere around 19% and the overall approval rating of Congress is lower than the President’s.

Hat Tip: Captains Quarters.

The past few days produced little news which left me feeling there was reason to tax my brain and attempt to write something intelligent. Perhaps after all the exhausting discussion on an illegal immigration bill which has not even come to either floor of Congress (while I still applaud the group of bipartisan senators who took the time to begin this process), I simply felt numb.

I turned my attention instead to the milblogs, several of which are daily reads for me and found myself grateful that they did not face the extermination feared a few weeks ago. Who else continuously tells the stories of our heroes both at home and abroad..certainly not the media, very seldom members of Congress and while the President praises the troops at every opportunity, somehow there is a void for those like me who feel our men and women in uniform deserve so much more.

When I read this, I felt compelled to see it was shared.

Cheers on Corridor Three
by LTC Bob Bateman
10:30 hours (local EST), Friday, 11 May 2007: Third Corridor, Second Floor, The Pentagon:

It is 110 yards from the “E” ring to the “A” ring of the Pentagon. This section of the Pentagon is newly renovated; the floors shine, the hallway is broad, and the lighting is bright. At this instant the entire length of the corridor is packed with officers, a few sergeants and some civilians, all crammed tightly three and four deep against the walls. There are thousands here. This hallway, more than any other, is the “Army” hallway. The G3 offices line one side, G2 the other, G8 is around the corner. All Army. Moderate conversations flow in a low buzz. Friends who may not have seen each other for a few weeks, or a few years, spot each other, cross the way and renew. Everyone shifts to ensure an open path remains down the center. The air conditioning system was not designed for this press of bodies in this area. The temperature is rising already. Nobody cares.

While that paragraph did not strike me as particularly newsworthy, what followed led to an emotional roller coaster.

10:36 hours (local EST):

The clapping starts at the E-Ring. That is the outermost of the five rings of the Pentagon and it is closest to the entrance to the building. This clapping is low, sustained, hearty. It is an applause with a deep emotion behind it as it moves forward in a wave down the length of the hallway. A steady rolling wave of sound it is, moving at the pace of the soldier in the wheelchair who marks the forward edge with his presence. He is the first. He is missing the greater part of one leg, and some of his wounds are still suppurating.

There was compassion and prayers for those receiving this tribute but also pride in knowing the “family” which is the US military continues to thrive.

Given this:

This parade has gone on, every single Friday, all year long, for more than four years.

I only wish I would have known long ago.

HT:Blackfive

If you know a man or woman who has served or is serving this country in the US military, offer them extra thanks today.

Armed Forces Day
“America Supports You”
Saturday, May 19, 2007

PDF Version President Harry S. Truman led the effort to establish a single holiday for citizens to come together and thank our military members for their patriotic service in support of our country.

Instead of doing the Constitutional thing and voting to defund the war Congress has decided to let our soldiers die by a thousand cuts.

The Democrats still want to tie supplemental funding to withdrawal dates while knowing the president will veto it. This time we have waivable timelines, whatever their definition of “waivable” is.

We are over 100 days from the president’s request for supplemental funding and we haven’t made any progress on it whatsoever.

We are way past the critical point and I feel so bad for the soldiers who put their lives at risk every day and this is the thanks they get.

Negotiations for emergency war funds stalled as soon as they began yesterday, with both the White House and the Democrat-led Congress immediately rejecting the other’s modest concessions.

After emerging from an hourlong Capitol Hill meeting, President Bush’s chief of staff, Joshua B. Bolten, said the Democrats’ offer of waivable timelines for withdrawing troops from Iraq were unacceptable.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said the White House’s proposal of policy benchmarks, backed up by the threat of cutting off aid to Iraq, was too weak.

The Democratic leaders, who say they will continue to push for an end to the war in Iraq, plan to draft a funding bill over the weekend and pass it by the end of next week, before Congress takes a weeklong Memorial Day break beginning May 28.

“Whether [the president] vetoes the bill or not is up to him,” said Mr. Reid, Nevada Democrat. “We have a responsibility to the American people, and we’re going to live up to that every minute of the next week.”

Mr. Bush vetoed the $124 billion bill Congress sent him last month because it included a pullout timetable, and he has made it clear he will veto any measure that restricts funds or dictates military strategy.

“Whether waivable or not, timelines send exactly the wrong signal to our adversaries, to our allies and, most importantly, to the troops in the field,” Mr. Bolten said. “The president is the one who has the authority to act as commander in chief. He needs to be the one making those decisions.”

The Republican National Committee released internal poll results yesterday that showed the majority of voters siding with Mr. Bush in the funding standoff, though the country remains deeply divided over the war.

About 60 percent say war funds should not come with a pullout timetable, and 32 percent say Congress should withhold funds until the president agrees to a withdrawal schedule, according to the poll. It also showed that 56 percent of voters say that setting a withdrawal date lets the enemy know when they can win.

But both sides vowed to stand firm in the tussle over $100 billion to pay for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan until the end of the fiscal year.

I’m tired of the same old rhetoric and I’m sick of our soldiers having to bend over and get a kick in the pants from their own government.

This is not a large blog and probably never will be, but we have many people who visit every day and don’t make comments.

I’m asking you to contact your Congressman on Monday and tell him or her it’s time to get a bill through that can be passed for the sake of our troops who didn’t ask to be in this situation.

If you don’t know the name or telephone number of your Congressman go here.

You can find information on how to contact your senators here, and you can find contact information for the White House switchboard here.

Everyone claims to support the troops. Now let’s see some action and stop with the lip service.

And if you want to show some personal support for the troops go here and give a couple of $25 donations to make a soldier’s life a little more pleasant. So you give up a couple of meals out. It will be worth it.

If you give to the USO you probably will want to know what your gift will do. Check the FAQs as the link I gave you is only from the receipt of what I sent and not the original information.

One question you will probably have is asked and answered here:

What items are included in the packages?

Generally, the care package contains, at a minimum, one prepaid international calling card, a disposable camera, toiletries, sunscreen and a generic message of support from the sender. Other items that are donated from manufacturers are included so that the maximum weight of each package is approximately 2 lbs. The retail value of each package generally is between $50 and $75.

The Senate Democrats have been foiled again in their effort to decide whether or not to fund the troops.

The Senate on Wednesday rejected legislation that would cut off money for combat operations in Iraq after March 31, 2008.

The vote was a loss for Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., and other Democrats who want to end the war. But the effort picked up support from members, including presidential hopefuls previously reluctant to limit war funding - an indication of the conflict’s unpopularity among voters.

The proposal lost 29-67 on a procedural vote, falling 31 votes short of the necessary votes to advance. Of the 67 senators who opposed Feingold’s proposal, there were 19 Democrats, 47 Republicans and Connecticut Independent Joseph Lieberman. Of the 29 supporting, 28 were Democrats and Vermont Independent Bernard Sanders.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, a Democratic presidential front-runner, previously opposed setting a deadline on the war. But she said she agreed to back the measure “because we, as a united party, must work together with clarity of purpose and mission to begin bringing our troops home and end this war.”

Sen. Barack Obama, another leading 2008 prospect, said he would prefer a plan that offers more flexibility but wanted “to send a strong statement to the Iraqi government, the president and my Republican colleagues that it’s long past time to change course.”

The proposal had been expected to fall short of the 60 votes needed to advance under Senate rules, but was intended to gauge the tolerance of members on anti-war legislation. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid staged a series of war votes Wednesday to inform negotiations with the House on a war spending bill.

“We stand united…. in our belief that troops are enmeshed in an intractable civil war,” said Reid, D-Nev.

Feingold’s measure, co-sponsored by Reid and Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., proved divisive for Democrats.

Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said he opposes any measure that cuts off money for the war.

“We don’t want to send the message to the troops” that Congress does not support them, said Levin, D-Mich. “We’re going to support those troops.”

But other Democrats said the move was necessary.

“I’m not crazy about the language in the Feingold amendment, but I am crazy about the idea that we have to keep the pressure on,” said Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., who also wants the Democratic presidential nomination.

They’re all dancing on the head of a pin saying they support the troops and then trying to justify a vote against the emergency funding bill.

Disgraceful.

Donald Sensing has posed a question which I am struggling to answer.

Must soldiers forgive their enemies?

For someone who professes to follow Jesus Christ, or at least follow his teachings, the subject of forgiveness is probably one of the most vexing. Jesus taught plainly that his followers are obligated to forgive, for example, “For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you; but if you do not forgive others, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses” (Mt. 6:14-15).

On the face of it, this would seem simple enough because most of the wrongs we suffer are petty enough that it is not worth carrying a grudge. In fact, we tend to think someone odd or a little unbalanced who nurses such grudges and always wants to balance a score, no matter how slight and unimportant the offense by any objective standard.

But hardly any of us suffer wrongs by someone who can realistically be called an “enemy.” An adversary perhaps, even an opponent, more likely a friend of family member, but how many of us have actually enemies, who seek to do us actual, genuine harm? I don’t mean only physical harm. Even so, I’d wager a small minority of people endure the blows, physical or otherwise, of actual enemies.

Except combat soldiers, who face very real and very lethal enemies practically daily. I use “soldiers” in its ancient, generic sense of any member of the armed forces who engages in direct combat or suffers its lethal effects.

Soldiers have actual enemies who really do wish them lethal harm and try to achieve that end. Are soldiers, the ones who profess loyalty to Christ, required to forgive those who try to kill them, or who succeed in killing or harming close friends?

Having seen the effects vicious enemies inflict on not only soldiers but their families, even being a Christian of strong faith, I admit I can come to no logical conclusion on this issue. Perhaps it should be simple given Christian teachings but internal conflicts stop me just short of being able to answer.

Any thoughts?

Please read the rest of this thought provoking essay.

How in the world could one justify this situation:

She had raised her daughter for six years following the divorce, handled the shuttling to soccer practice and cheerleading, made sure schoolwork was done. Hardly a day went by when the two weren’t together. Then Lt. Eva Crouch was mobilized with the Kentucky National Guard, and Sara went to stay with Dad.

A year and a half later, her assignment up, Crouch pulled into her driveway with one thing in mind - bringing home the little girl who shared her smile and blue eyes. She dialed her ex and said she’d be there the next day to pick Sara up, but his response sent her reeling.

“Not without a court order you won’t.”

Divorce, separation and child custody battles are not unique to the US military. However, Federal law which protects those in harms way evidently offers no guarantee that a deployed single parent with custodial rights will maintain that status upon their return.

A federal law called the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act is meant to protect them by staying civil court actions and administrative proceedings during military activation. They can’t be evicted. Creditors can’t seize their property. Civilian health benefits, if suspended during deployment, must be reinstated.

And yet service members’ children can be - and are being - taken from them after they are deployed.

Individual states have begun to address this issue and are initiating laws to insure the rights of these parents. Perhaps the federal government should do the same..for the sake of those fighting for our country and the welfare of their children.
Servicemembers Civil Relief Act
here.

Lorie Byrd is liveblogging the Milblogs conference taking place in Arlington VA. today.

Seems as though they had an unexpected visitor waiting for them this morning.

The service the owners and writers at the Milblogs provide to those of us looking for positive information on the US military is so valuable. It appears that surprise visitor believes the same.

Update: Watch the conference live here…

I wore a few of these POW bracelets years ago, but sadly I was never fortunate enough to meet the brave men they honored.

This is pretty remarkable:

ELKO, Nev. — As a teenager in Nebraska, Kathy Long wore a POW bracelet as part of a program to honor U.S. soldiers missing in action in Vietnam.

Engraved on the bracelet was the name of a soldier, Navy Lt. Commander John McCain, along with the date his jet was shot down in 1967.

More than 30 years later, Long finally met McCain _ during a campaign stop by the Republican presidential candidate Saturday in Elko.

While some might say Ms. Long had the advantage of owning the bracelet of a very well known POW it amazes me that after all these years she was able to make personal contact with Senator McCain. Rest of story.