Thursday, October 15, 2009

Sound Off

I want your opinions on a few things. So, please weigh in!


Kev and I were watching an Extreme Home Makeover re-run the other night. I don't remember the family members' names but I do remember that they lived in Arkansas. Anyway, we had Mom, Daughter and Son present for the taping. Their "claim to fame"/reason they were chosen for the show is, Mom started a non-profit (which I also don't remember the name of) which assists/works with the Missing and Exploited Children Organization, after her 3rd child (a daughter) was abducted 10 year earlier. Ty and the gang were in attendance for the 10-year anniversary of when the daughter was taken.

While Kev and I watched the episode we discussed the fact that this girl had been abducted 10 years earlier and that I couldn't possibly be as hopeful as this mom was. Kevin disagreed and said if it were my own child that I'd feel differently. Egh... maybe. Maybe not.

I got to discussing this episode with my mom a few days ago. I told her I didn't believe that I would be able to hold onto hope for that long. I went onto tell Mom how 'they' (the episode) campaigned very hard to get your kids finger-printed and have a current picture (at least once every 6 months) at all times -- as a PREVENTATIVE measure. I'm sorry people but how on earth are having pics and your babies fingerprinted going to prevent some psycho from snatching them off of the street? Prolly won't. Sorry to poo-poo that idea. Well, Mom agreed. She suggested Chipping your kids. We chip our dogs, right? Why not?

Those of you who just cringed and cursed my mom, take a minute and really consider it. If (God-forbid) someone were to abduct your son or daughter wouldn't you want to have this back-up?? For anyone who actually has their dog chipped you know that you can't just voila! activate it and have your mutt picked up lickety-split; whomever finds your precious pup had to take them to a vet and the vet activates your chip....... if all that goes according to plan then you can bring your dog home. I'm thinking I'd prefer something more along the lines of "LoJack". GPS.

{again, stop cringing... hear me out}

"LoJack, not LowJack, is the only vehicle recovery system operated directly by law enforcement. The moment you report a car stolen, a routine entry into the state crime database will automatically trigger the LoJack System hidden well on your automobile. The car tracking device begins to emit an inaudible signal that police can use to track the path of your vehicle. Law enforcement authorities then follow the signal, track down and recover your car and return it to you. "

I think that if some sick-o stole my kid, I'd wish I had them chipped (at an early age, it wouldn't be painful, ect ect ect.) so that the Police/FBI (whomever "they" deem) could track them down and bring them home.

You're turn. What do you think? Sound off!

I brought this up to my neighbor, Nikki. She hated the idea. She didn't want "the man" (lol) knowing where she was at all times. I think this is BOGUS! "the man" already knows where you are; and if not, he sure as shit knows how to find your sneaky-ass ASAP! So I'm gonna go ahead and poo-poo that argument. I would rather have "the man" be able to track me because he's bored and has nothing better to do, if it meant I could (if the need should arise) find my stolen child and bring them home. Versus suffering, wallowing, wondering and HOPING they would someday find their way back home.



How do we feel about the Afghan discussion in Washington right now?
Yes, I say "we"... we are now a collective and think as one.


Seriously, what are your thoughts? SOUND OFF!

This may be an immature or simple-minded viewpoint but really, troop increase or whatever they decide. I kind of don't really care- honestly. Here's what I do care about: I care about finality. I care about Levi, my brother-in-law currently serving his 4th deployment, in Afghanistan. I care that he got swept up in the first troop surge... which is odd because that was suppose to be in Iraq- right? Lord, who knows anymore? Well, he was in Afghanistan at the time and was still extended to 15 months. It sucked. Increase troops, fine. Whatever. I don't think that they should make the guys already serving over there have to stay even longer in order to reach their "additional surge numbers". Whatever they turn out to be. I say: Send the guy who's only deployed once and drove a desk since 03. Send the douche-bags I see walking around post without a combat patch. Versus, more or less penalizing the soldiers who know what they signed up for and who suck-it-up and deploy time-after-time-after-time.
Hmm. I'm thinking that's goin to be unpopular. Oh well.

Coming back to Finality. If an increase is determined to be necessary in Afghanistan then it better it be successful. Make it count. Please don't make it a habit either. The Iraqi surge was successful and the majority of the troops left behind are non-combat related. So "they" say. All the same, if a surge is necessary I hope it would speed up the final exit from Afghanistan.

Ok, I'm tired and have written enough for one day. Please weigh in. Please don't go on and on about how repubs or demo's suck at life. It's not relevant. And it sort of bores me.


lola said...

I don't know where I stand on the increase. On one hand, with Matt over there, I say give him and all servicemen and women there what they need. On the other hand I'd much rather have them all home. Not that bringing them all home is even on the table right now. My biggest sticking point is that they put this general in, he's made his recommendations. Take his recommendations. He knows what is best for the mission because he's actually there. Will it work? No one knows. That's what makes like "interesting." I've listened to lectures online advocating that Iraq and A-stan are vastly different and because a surge worked in Iraq doesn't mean that it will work in A-stan. I have also listened to lectures about how if we do not surge in A-stan, we risk a collapse of that government, which could in turn lead to a devastating problem with Pakistan. Pakistan has nukes. We don't need that area more unstable than it already is.

Long story short, I have no idea what's best and I've done a *TON* of reading on the subject. That's why I'm not a General but am tempted to say listen to McChrystal. He knows what we need.

Paula said...

I did not see the Home Makeover that you are refering to, but I think that the taping being on the 10 year anniversary of the abduction of their daughter was planned to put the spot light back on this story. As a Mom, I would never stop hoping for a happy ending, I would never stop looking at every child I see to compare to what my child would look like. Until I had proof that the worst had happened I would never give up hope until my last breath. That is to say that you have to go on living and especially if you have other children you cannot just stop living, you need to keep life as normal as it can be. I cannot fathom what that would feel like. As far as finger prints and current pictures, that would be helpful in the early stages of an abduction.When I go help with the Navy wives baby showers there is a group that comes in and tells new parents on how to keep their baby safe and they hand out forms on which to put finger prints and current pics.We never think it will happen to us, but we need to be as prepared as possible. As far as the chip idea, I think it sounds great in theory but don't know how feasible it would be. And I know there would be a substantial cost involved in montoring. While alot of parents might be a position to do this, I think the majority of families would not. I don't know what the percentage of snatched children to non snatched children is, but I know cost would be a factor and I also know if one of my children were snatched I would feel the precentage is 100.Having "the man" know where I am does not concern me, but it could be a slippery slope. I do feel that educating kids and having them be aware of their surroundings is important. while I am not naive to think that this is the total answer, every little bit helps.
There was a show on Oprah the other day dealing with missing children and with such a large viewing population there might be the chance that one child might be found. In dealing with the "worst possible" outcome, what about having a mandatory DNA database? DNA stays active for a very long time and if a child is found not alive this might be a way for the family to get closure. If a child is found after alot of years, then this would also let them know that this is their child. Even after 10 or 20 years.
In regards to the additional troops, I don't know the answer, but I know there are people who do and they are not the ones who reside in Wash. DC, I think if you have enough confidence to appoint a person to be General, let him do his job and listen to him. I know as you do, how hard it is to have a loved one deployed multiple times. While the soldier may be across the world, those left here are just as alone and worried. That is a very unstable part of the world and that is scary.

jenn said...

wow...lots to think about!!

being a parent and god forbid one of my boys ever being abducted and not found...i KNOW i would still hold out hope until i had some shred of evidence telling me otherwise. yes, the chances are slim the more time goes by...but, you would still have hope!!

in regard, to the troop surge....
NO -- i don't want more troops to go BUT, i want us to win and if that means more soldiers....then we need to do it!!
we need to give the soldiers what they need to win and to fight this war!!!
obamas 18,000 more troops isn't going to do the job. he needs to listen to gen mc chrystal and give them what they need. he doesn't need to try and be the 'popular' guy that he wants to be....he needs to give our troops what they need to fight and win and then we can get out of there. let the general that you appointed do his job and TRUST him.

Lauren B. said...

my dogs are micro chipped and i would have hannah chipped as well if it was available, and honestly i don't know why it's not. if people are willing to get their pets chipped in order to find them if they ever get lost, why not their children?

JG said...

As far as the troop thing, from what I understand, the options are this: Either pull out completely and leave the region in a shambles; continue with current troop levels and be there a long, long time; have another surge and be there a shorter amount of time.

1 has been ruled out by every military person I've heard of, on TV or in person, as a bad idea. Plus if you review the history of A-stan, that's what screwed them up in the first place back in the 70s, where we went in and didn't finish the job, then pulled out and let the Taliban and the communists butcher the people as they fought for control. We don't need a repeat of Vietnam.

2 sounds like a good on the one hand if it means more guys here at home at a time, but it also means that eventually more people would have to go because it would take longer to get finished.

3 sounds crappy on the front, because it means that lots of us would be sending our troops over probably sooner than we expected or for longer. But, if it means a 5 year war as opposed to a 15 year one, that seems to make the most sense. Plus if there are more troops over at once, it stands to reason there are more to protect each other.

Does that make sense?