Over lunch today I switched on my cable news channel and saw something that made my stomach turn. A bunch of foreign service officers from the State Department fucking whining about how they don’t want to be sent to Iraq. One of them said that they didn’t want to go, because they’d surely be killed and they wanted to live long enough to raise their children.
It was at this point that my frickin’ blood started to boil.
Live long enough to raise their children? How about the almost 4,000 Americans that have been killed in that part of the world and their children? What about their widows? My friend Paul died in Al Anbar Province last year, left behind a wife and toddler, and his wife never complained. She understands that it was his job. It was his duty. But somehow these sorry excuses for human beings in the State Department believe that they are somehow better.
Let me make something crystal fucking clear. You take Uncle Sugar’s dime, you fucking go where he tells you to. If you don’t like it, quit. It’s really that simple.
Military guys (and gals) don’t really get a choice, but then again, their situation is unique. They spent the first few days on the job wearing camoflage and shooting guns—-it’s sort of implied that they may get sent to unpleasant places, see unpleasant things, and kill (or be killed by) really unpleasant people. State Department people have something that military folks don’t, and that is the option to resign.
Job too nasty or dangerous? Then fucking quit. Get the fuck out and quit whining. Working for the government is not a welfare program (okay, you could make a strong argument otherwise, but that’s a discussion for later), so earn your pay or leave. Nobody’s making you stay.
Just read some of the things they are saying over at B5:
“Others pointed out the risks of such a rule, considering the dangers of a war zone, lack of security and regular rocket attacks on U.S. personnel.”We all had a good laugh over that line here at Camp Victory.
I liked Subsunk’s take on the whining of Foreign Service Officers. Like military officers, these guys hold a commission from the president. They also take an oath, the same oath as the Secretary of State, and it has that line in it about “all enemies foreign and domestic.”
Even, you know, the ones with rockets.
Guess what, boys? You’re volunteers too. You can resign that commission any time you want.
Fuckin’ A.
Perhaps some of you out there may find my words to be a bit harsh. Believe me, I’m holding back.
I’m sure there are plenty of talented and dedicated people in the State Department—-hell, there’s got to be. But these whiny little douche-bags are giving them a bad name.
If it were up to me, every single one of those FSOs that publicly complained would be out on their asses right now looking for other employment. You don’t have to agree with the policy, but you do have to do your job. I didn’t like the military’s role in the foreign policy decisions of the Clinton administration back in the 90’s, but I didn’t publicly speak out, and I didn’t punch out either. In fact I volunteered for some rather shitty assignments to support those decisions because it was my fucking job! I didn’t like Clinton and I thought his policies were lunacy, but my job was to uphold my oath and I did it. These FSOs need to uphold theirs too. And if they can’t then they need to quit and do something else. Period.
I’m sure these people could find work in the private sector or in other government agencies in short order. We’re not exactly talking about a bunch of high school drop-outs here.
So in summary… for all you FSOs who are opposed to being ordered to serve in Iraq out there—-shut up, move out, or submit your fucking resignation. I’m tired of listening to your bitching.
Marcus
This, as was reported on October 27th, is the result of FSO being required to go to Iraq rather than it being a purely voluntary gig.
http://justbarkingmad.com/?p=2222
Thus far, I’m not hearing reports that anyone’s not reported for duty, refused a directed assignment, resigned, or otherwise fallen on their sword. In fact, what I read (which makes it official) yesterday morning was that there’d been another 15 volunteers so, rather than 48 (of 252) jobs requiring someone be directed to take the position, only 33 positions remain as yet unfilled in Iraq for 2008.
I’ve quoted you and linked to you here: http://consul-at-arms.blogspot.com/2007/11/re-foreign-service-officers.html
Well, I’m glad to hear that there are more volunteers—I’m just not wild about the very public resistance to being sent there.
The “public resistance” of one guy. Plus Prof. Juan Cole.
Nothing about the 204 (oops, 219) FSOs who’ve already volunteered to fill Iraq positions next year nor the volunteers who’ve filled every FSO position in Iraq through the current year.
A lot of smoke and noise, not much actual fire and rebellion.
If it wasn’t causing such backbiting from the military services, it’d be laughable.
Who benefits when our uniformed and diplomatic services squabble?