Civilian Affairs or Staff Pukes

The losing candidate for Ohio’s 2nd Congressional District, Paul Hackett, served with the Marine Corps in Iraq.

Here’s Rush Limbaugh’s take:

RUSH: [Hackett] was in the Civilian Affairs Unit, and this is a Washington Post story (it says here) from July 30th. “A lawyer and a major in the Marine reserves, Hackett volunteered last year to serve in Iraq and spent seven months there in the civilian affairs job, including service around Ramadi and Fallujah. He returned to Ohio in March, decided to jump into the race for Portman’s seat, seeking to become the first Iraq war veteran elected to Congress.” So he volunteered to serve, spent seven months in a civilian affairs job. What is that, since you’re — did you say you’re a Marine?
CALLER: I’m in the Navy, sir, Navy lieutenant.
RUSH: Navy. What is a civilian affairs job? You tell me.
CALLER: Civilian affairs is just basically a public affairs job where they interact with the civilian authorities from a military perspective. It’s a military liaison, if you will.
RUSH: Oh, it’s a military liaison. Is it a combat position or not?
CALLER: Negative. It is not a combat position.
…
RUSH: Okay, call him a staff puke if that’s what you want, but civilian affairs, staff puke. Bottom line is he’s running a fraudulent, deceptive campaign, and the Democrats are saying this is a bellwether election.

What do others say about our Civilian Affairs efforts in Iraq?

How about the Department of Defense?

Military leaders may have given the civil affairs mission relatively short shrift in the past, but no more. They’ve come to recognize the important role of civil and are incorporating civil-military operations into their battle plans from the earliest planning stages. Trained civil affairs staffs now are an integral part of every command staff.

“The words ‘civil-military operations’ are now in the Army lexicon,” said Anderson. “It’s not an afterthought anymore.”

But just as the military is gaining a better appreciation of the value civil affairs, the Army is finding itself stretched painfully thin in manpower to cover the demand.

from Victor Davis Hanson’s website

On November 15th, meanwhile, the troops at the CMOC had to contend with some real fires of their own. These civil affairs soldiers quickly shifted gears into combat mode when insurgents launched a series of attacks against Iraqi and Coalition targets in Baquba. As the CMOC came under sporadic mortar fire, they assumed their battle stations, completed their pre-combat inspections, maintained communications with elements of the 3rd Brigade Combat Team on the compound, and provided timely assistance to members of the Iraqi National Guard. Their military training was put to the test. Soldiers first, they were force multipliers that day. The CMOC remained secure.

Civil affairs units elsewhere are helping to stabilize Iraq by combating insurgents and winning hearts and minds. A Defense Department spokesman recently summed it up best: Army leaders now “recognize the important role of civil affairs and are incorporating civil-military operations into their battle plans from the earliest planning stages. Trained civil affairs staffs now are an integral part of every command staff.” Or in other words, they are force multipliers on the twenty-first-century battlefield

These winners of the coveted Presidential Unit Citation:

On the second anniversary of the start of combat operations in Iraq, the 422nd Civil Affairs Battalion received the Army’s highest unit award, the Presidential Unit Citation, during a ceremony at the Reeve Reserve Center here March 19. The 422nd CA Bn., nicknamed the Centurion Battalion, is a North Carolina-based Army Reserve special operations unit that deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom from March 2003 to March 2004. According to Army regulations, the Presidential Unit Citation is awarded to units “for extraordinary heroism in action against an armed enemy” and is the premier unit award the Army bestows.

I could go on and on. Anyone who wants can Google “Civilian Affairs Iraq,” and see what they find.

Unlike Rush Limbaugh —

I support the war on terror.

I support our actions in Iraq.

I want to WIN the war in Iraq.

I support our civil affairs officers in Iraq.

Rush Limbaugh is a disgrace. He should apologize to Hackett, to every Civil Affairs officer in Iraq, and to every one of our fighting men and women in Iraq.

Comments

  1. MSG Robert McLaughlin wrote:

    I spent 11 years in the 426th CA and deployed with them to Bosnia. After leaving in 1999 I am now being called back to Civil Affairs. I leave next Sunday for Iraq. To anyone in doubt about what we do, I say stop watching war movies that show US Forces, Nazis, and the French Resistance as the only players in a war zone. There are far far more civilians than anyone would ever imagine. That is why we exist. The civilians can be in the way, they can be casualties, they can help or they can hurt the mission. Come on over, Rush.

    Posted 04 Dec 2005 at 9:21 pm

  2. peter wrote:

    Staff Pukes?!? Civil Affairs soldiers had one of the highest percentage of casualties because of what they do - go out amongst the local population. Especially early in the way often while providing their own security in thnk-skinned HMMWVs. Some with Special Forces and police backgrounds formed the nucleus of the indigenous security forces under extremely austere conditions. The tactical Civil Affairs teams go on as many patrols as their comba arms bretheren. The Army has recognized them - and other non-combat arms - for engaging the enemy with the Combat Action Badge: the equivalent of the Combat Infantry Badge. Staff pukes? Shame on Rush! I used to think he knew better…..

    Posted 31 Jan 2006 at 9:22 pm

  3. blackdog wrote:

    Civil Affairs Operators are anything but rear enchelon M*%$#@%^$#. They do have to walk a fine live of diplomacy and well properly measured violence. They are found handing out soccer balls and building hospitals but have been trained to rain hell fire on anyone who decides to take active measures to prevent their efforts to win over hearts and minds.

    Whether they be male or female, every member of a civil affairs A-Team or Operations Center has been trained in advanced infantry skills. Every A-team carries M-4s and M-9s with a selection of M240Bs, M2439s, M2s or MK19s. Men and women alike receive the best training that the JFK Special Warfare Center has to offer and they accel at it or they are dropped from the program.

    Civil Affairs Operators do speak softly but they carry an awfully big stick and they do know how to use it. They are not weak hearted and it is not a career path for the week hearted. CA Operators are found to be in more combat action than infantry units and have taken the highest percentage of casualties to date because they pi$$ing the enemy off by being so good at what they do.

    Posted 09 Mar 2006 at 12:31 am

  4. Fallujah Grunt wrote:

    I served in Fallujah.
    I FOUGHT in Fallujah (you know, bullets, RPGs, IEDs, etc?). Hackett misrepresents his service, as do his supporters. Some of his Democrat supporters even claim that he was involved in “hand to hand” combat. He did not.
    Fact is, he never ONCE fired his weapon. He was never shot at. He was never attacked with an IED.
    But he DID pass out “3,000 soccer balls, and 5,000 bookbags” to kids (from HIS commendation).
    But no combat. Marines who claim to have “been in combat” speak a very specific language that is NOT open to fuzzy interpretations. A Marine who claims this, has been awarded the Combat Action Ribbon. Hackett has NOT.
    He served OUTSIDE of Fallujah.
    He misrepresents his service, as do his supporters.

    He may be a fellow Marine, but he is a fraud. He claims credit for something that me and my men bled in order to EARN it.

    Semper fi, Mac.

    Posted 31 Aug 2006 at 9:16 pm

  5. John the Marine wrote:

    Fallujah Grunt,

    Semper Fi brother and thankyou for your service. Unlike you I fought in the previous Persian Gulf conflict (the easy one) but we have two things in common; a combat action ribbon, and a dislike for those who claim honors they haven’t earned. From what I can gather this guy seems like a “pogue” (rear echelon type). Some one above, SeanH, goes on about the necessity of support MOS’s. He’s right we need them, but they are not the same as COMBAT PERSONEl and they don’t rate the laurels of combat. If this guy ran on a false combat record he should be hung from his balls and set on fire.

    But, before I take a gigantic sh-t on Hackett I would need to know:

    1. Does he have a combat action ribbon?

    2. Above it states,”A lawyer and a major in the Marine reserves, Hackett volunteered last year to serve in Iraq and spent seven months there in the civilian affairs job”. A major who is a lawyer? That seems like a lot of juice for this guy to be in harms way. Who was he with, what was his unit?

    3. Lastly what do the people he served with say? Do they confirm his story or not?

    Since you’ve been there your word carries a lot of weight with me. This Hackett guy seems slimy. Besides, I never like HG types much anyway, especially Officers.

    As for Rush… I could care less what he spews from his suck hole.

    Posted 01 Sep 2006 at 8:26 am

  6. commissar wrote:

    Fallujah Grunt,

    It’s a matter of record that Hackett served honorably in the Marines, He was in Iraq, well outside the Green Zone.

    All that makes him a better man than me.

    And, if not a “better man” than Rush Limbaugh, at least it deserves his respect.

    Outside of FOBs and the Green Zone, there are no “rear areas” in Iraq. Calling Hackett a staff puke, a REMF, a Fobbit, is disgraceful.

    None of this has anything to do with Hackett’s recent comments.

    BTW, I just bough Bing West’s book about Fallujah. Have you read it? Any opinions? Any books that you would recommend about Iraq. I’m now reading “Marines in the Garden of Eden,” mostly about the 1/2 in Nasiriyah in March 2003.

    Posted 01 Sep 2006 at 12:08 pm

  7. Fallujah Grunt wrote:

    commisar:
    Bing West lived with me and my boys. His book is dead on in terms of accuracy.

    John the Marine wrote:

    “But, before I take a gigantic sh-t on Hackett I would need to know:

    1. Does he have a combat action ribbon?”

    -No, he most definitely does NOT.

    “Lastly what do the people he served with say? Do they confirm his story or not?”

    -I’ve read the summary of action for his award. Not one sngle word that mentions combat. Not one. That plus the missing CAR makes it open and shut.

    “Since you’ve been there your word carries a lot of weight with me. This Hackett guy seems slimy. Besides, I never like HG types much anyway, especially Officers.”

    Hey! I’m also a Major. But unlike Hackett, I’m not a complete a$$hole. (I hope not!)

    Posted 01 Sep 2006 at 4:33 pm

  8. Fallujah Grunt wrote:

    Commisar said:

    “It’s a matter of record that Hackett served honorably in the Marines, He was in Iraq, well outside the Green Zone.

    All that makes him a better man than me.”

    Don’t sell yourself short, commisar.
    Hackett’s recent behavior is quite telling. Odds are, you are a much better man than he -regardless of his service.

    Posted 01 Sep 2006 at 5:11 pm

  9. John the Marine wrote:

    Hey! I’m also a Major. But unlike Hackett, I’m not a complete a$$hole. (I hope not!)

    Sorry, about that Sir. We, enlisted types have a tendency beat on officers a little. I got out as a Lcpl (pg 11 and pg 12 don’t get you Cpl) Also, being a Trac-rat (AAVP7A1’s) spending time with the grunts might have eroded my manners.

    Judging from your above comments… some one should get the lighter fluid and some thin rope (see comment 41 for the reason).

    Posted 02 Sep 2006 at 8:44 am

« Intelligence Design - Potential Benefit
Free Tuition to National Guardsmen »