This is a photo of my grandfather's gravesite at Arlington National Cemetery, taken during Memorial Day weekend 2002. He served our country through World War II, Korea, and Vietnam until his death in 1962.

I also want to note my brothers' service in the United States Marine Corps, which celebrated its 230^th birthday yesterday. And that of my father-in-law, who served in the United States Navy and Naval Reserves. I also want to include my friend Johnny, who just returned a couple of weeks ago from a year long tour-of-duty in Iraq. Thanks for your service.

Please remember to take time today and thank any veterans you know for their service. It is by such service and sacrifice that we and the freedoms we hold dear are protected. To those who have served, both past and present, I want to say thank you for your time and commitment in protecting our nation and on behalf of the cause of freedom and liberty.

• History of Veterans Day
• Veterans Day FAQ
• U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Veterans Day page

LaShawn Barber also has lots of links to other bloggers observing Veterans Day.

This is a repost with some additions from Veterans Day last year.

Today is the 230^th birthday of the United States Marine Corps.

Congratulations to all Marines, past and present, and thank you for your service.

Semper Fi

Actually, they landed in Sri Lanka yesterday. Here's a link to the Reuters video (and story) on their arrival.

A first group of United States Marines arrived in Sri Lanka on Monday (January 3) with helicopters, bulldozers, generators and other specialist equipment to help the country deal with the aftermath of the deadly Indian Ocean tsunami.

This Cox & Forkum cartoon captures the situation perfectly.

UPDATE: Donald Rumsfeld made a surprise Christmas Eve visit to U.S. troops in Mosul.

U.S. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld visited wounded soldiers and brought holiday greetings on Christmas Eve amid tight security at an air base in northern Iraq where an insurgent's attack killed 14 U.S. troops and eight other people earlier this week.

UPDATE II: Here's more on Donald Rumsfeld's visit to Mosul. (From Power Line)

The attack on FOB Marez was most likely caused by a suicide bomber.

Tuesday's attack was the deadliest breach of security at a U.S. military base since the Iraq war began. Pentagon spokesman Lawrence DiRita said there will be a reassessment of U.S. security procedures as a result. Related: Photos from the scene)

U.S. officials initially reported that rocket or mortar fire had struck the plastic-skinned tent Tuesday at Forward Operating Base Marez. But Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Pentagon briefing, "We have had a suicide bomber apparently strap something to his body ... and go into a dining hall."

I expect the blame game will start with the usual suspects (MSM, Dems, anti-war crowd, etc.) blaming Rumsfeld and the Pentagon brass for being unprepared for such a style of attack and demanding an investigation. And an investigation should be launched; it just shouldn't be politicized. The purpose of any investigation into how a terrorist got into the tent with an IED shouldn't be to place blame, but to determine what can be done to prevent a future tragedy. Look for old media, though, to put the pressure on to find out who's to blame, not at looking for ways to prevent a future attack like this one from occurring.

In related news, Donald Rumsfeld expressed grief over the criticism that he has been receiving the past two weeks.

Looking more subdued than during most of his public appearances at the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld responded to a barrage of criticism Wednesday by saying he cares deeply about the lives of U.S. troops who go in harm's way.

One day after 14 U.S. soldiers and four contractors died in a suicide bombing at an Army mess hall near Mosul, Rumsfeld did something he has rarely done in four years on the job: He talked about his feelings.

"I am truly saddened by the thought that anyone could have the impression that I or others here are doing anything other than working urgently to see that the lives of the fighting men and women are protected and cared for in every way humanly possible," Rumsfeld said. He said he shares "deeply" the loss family members feel when a soldier dies.

I heard about this on the radio while I was out earlier today doing some last minute Christmas shopping. Islamic militants struck a mess hall on a military base in northern Iraq near Mosul.

Rockets struck a mess tent at a military base in Mosul where hundreds of U.S. soldiers had just sat down to lunch Tuesday, and military officials said at least 20 people were killed and more than 60 were wounded. A radical Muslim group, the Ansar al-Sunnah Army, claimed responsibility.

The dead included U.S. military personnel, U.S. contractors, foreign national contractors and Iraqi army, said Brig. Gen. Carter Ham, commander of Task Force Olympia in Mosul.

The number of casualties is unclear, but within moments of the attack soldiers where tending to the wounded.

The force of the explosions knocked soldiers off their feet and out of their seats as a fireball enveloped the top of the tent and shrapnel sprayed into the area, Redmon said.

Amid the screaming and thick smoke in the tent, soldiers turned their tables upside down, placed the wounded on them and gently carried them into the parking lot, [Jeremy] Redmon [Richmond, Va., Times-Dispatch reporter] said.

Scores of troops crammed into concrete bomb shelters, while others wandered around in a daze and collapsed, he said.

Other sources: FOX News, Reuters, and MSNBC.

Old media, having failed to take down President Bush, now seems to have its sights set on Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. First, came the up-armor non-story. Here's what one National Guardsman serving with the 278th in Northern Iraq thinks about the up-armor controversy.

Now comes the revelation that, Rumsfeld didn't sign the letters of condolence sent to the families of U.S. service members killed in action.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has decided to personally sign condolence letters to the family members of U.S. troops killed in action rather than letting a machine affix his signature.

Republican and Democratic members of Congress criticized the embattled Pentagon chief on Sunday for not signing the letters himself all along.

Let me make sure I understand this. Rumsfeld is not fit to be Secretary of Defense because he didn't put pen to paper when signing these condolence letters. In what way does this impact his ability to lead the nation's armed forces?

What it amounts to is a political jihad to get Rumsfeld's scalp by some politicians sniffing the wind and noticing that Rumsfeld's approval rating is falling. If the issue is with the composition of the armed forces, or the number of troops in Iraq, or the failure to anticipate a guerilla war in Iraq, or some other factor Rumsfeld had (or should have had) control over, fine. Maybe he deserves to be run out of Washington for any (or all) of these reasons. But to focus on a completely manufactured and bogus issue, or one as trivial as whether the signature on a letter was ink from a pen or ink from a stamp seems ridiculous to me.

Well, at least President Bush is sticking by his Secretary of Defense.

Rumsfeld over the weekend was accused of being insensitive after admitting he did not personally sign letters of condolence to families of more than 1,000 soldiers killed in Iraq but instead had them signed by auto-pen.

Rumsfeld later said he would now sign them by hand.

"Sometimes, perhaps his demeanor is rough and gruff. But below that rough and gruff, no-nonsense demeanor is a good human being who cares deeply about the military and deeply about the grief that war causes," Bush said.

Other reactions:

• Captain's Quarters, more here
• Power Line
• One Hand Clapping
• Stephen Bainbridge, more here and still more here
• PunditGuy
• Outside the Beltway

Linked to Outside the Beltway Traffic Jam

I have not yet had the opportunity to visit Europe, although I have the desire to travel there sometime in my life. Among the places I would like to visit are the beaches at Normandy and Bastogne.

These are sacred places and I would very much like to honor the memories of the men who died in these places for their sacrifice in defeating a great evil in their time.

Power Line points to the transcript of a press conference where the issue of up-armoring the vehicles in the unit of the National Guardsman who asked the question of Donald Rumsfeld about the lack of armor on various military vehicles was addressed. As the transcript makes clear, the Army was already deploying armor kits to the vehicles in Iraq, as part of a program over the past 18 months.

Now, we're going to focus today on up-armoring tactical wheeled vehicles, but what I want to do is remind you also that what we're doing today when we talk about tactical wheeled vehicles is only a part of a very broad strategy that's been in effect for many months now, as all of us work under the Secretary of Defense's direction to ensure that we properly protect Soldiers. So up-armoring is only a part of a comprehensive strategy. And although we won't address these topics today, what we also need to bear in mind is that we have very important efforts that are going on and have been long-standing programs over the course of the last 18 months to ensure that we counter IEDs with an IED task force; that we properly ensure that we give Soldiers more fire power, more armaments so that they can shoot more effectively and with more effect, and then also to protect them, both not only their vehicles but also the personal equipment that they wear on their body.

...

Level two force protection says that you have an existing fleet of many thousands of vehicles out there, and what you have to do is put additional protection on vehicles that are already in use out across the Army's inventory. And so that has been the other principal focus that we have. We can't automatically or magically swap out all of the equipment that we have out in the theater, but what we can do is develop programs where we take kits and put them onto existing pieces of equipment.

Now this is not a trivial process. We'll talk to you about the testing that goes into these level two kits, so that we put the right things on pieces of equipment. We'll talk about making sure that the actual system can continue to operate with many thousand more pounds on it, in some cases.

For example, for a humvee, the typical add-on armor kit is just over a thousand pounds. And so you could imagine, if I took and put a thousand pounds more weight on your -- the vehicle you drive back and forth to work, it would have secondary impacts in terms of your suspension and your powertrain. We have to test those things out to make sure that we're giving a soldier something that can endure in combat; it won't just break the minute he starts to operate it. So the level-two kit is a sophisticated requirement and one that we've been very successful in adapting, not just for humvees but, as we'll show you, for a variety of systems. And then level three is locally fabricated armor.

...

But over time now we've grown to a very, very high standard, and when you go, for example, and visit the fabrication facilities that we have in Kuwait today, what you'll see is, first of all, the Defense Logistics Agency-approved steel being used. You'll see actual templates that have been designed in part by the drivers who operate the equipment. And you'll see very, very experienced machinists and welders who are putting this stuff on. And we'll show you some pictures of what high-quality work this is. This is an interim solution, but it's a darn good solution that's been very, very effective as we take a look at what we've done to protect the force.

This process isn't limited solely to Iraq either.

So for example, right now, if you go to Fort Carson, the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment is executing up-armoring this week, and they will have that effort complete here in the course of the next several weeks. The goal then being that when they deploy, the majority of the pieces of equipment that they're going to deploy will already have up-armoring added to them. They will then complete that operation with fewer pieces of equipment when they actually get into combat zones. So we will have taken care of the bulk of their requirement at home station.

We have a similar effort under way in U.S. Army Europe. As you're aware, we have forces there that are going to deploy to Afghanistan, and when they deploy to Afghanistan, what we want to try to do once again is get up-armoring solutions to them now instead of waiting till they get to the combat zone.

And here is the current status of the up-armored vehicles in Iraq:

Now, where are we today? We've had a discussion here about the level one, level two and level three. This is the status of forces today with respect to what has been armored in theater, okay? As General Speakes mentioned, we're doing everything we can with respect to getting level one and level two there. At this point in time, because of the production requirements, we have actually begun to install level three. And between the two of them combined, today we have about 61 percent of the vehicles taken care of.

I would point out here, though, that with respect to the light tactical vehicles, and that's the vehicles that have been suffering the majority of casualties and the majority of incidents, we're now at 80 percent, and the plan is by March to actually have not only these vehicles taken care of but also the heavy truck fleet, so we'll have those installed in theater.

And in regards to the unit of the National Guardsman who asked the up-armor question of Donald Rumsfeld:

Q Thank you. I was wondering if we should be thinking about the difference between soldiers who are going to be headed into Iraq and Soldiers who are already there. A lot of the concerns about who did and didn't have were from soldiers who were going in, and I didn't -- I personally didn't get a sense of what the people who are already there are using and what their needs and gaps are.

GEN. SPEAKES: Very, very good question. The first point is that you'll recollect that one of the questions was the status of the 278 ACR; in other words, the date that we had the visit by the secretary of Defense, we had a question about their up-armoring status. When the question was asked, 20 vehicles remained to be up-armored at that point. We completed those 20 vehicles in the next day. And so over 800 vehicles from the 278 ACR were up-armored, and they are a part now of their total force that is operating up in Iraq.

Q When you say they're 100 percent up-armored, does that mean 100 percent of their requirement or 100 percent of their vehicles?

GEN. SPEAKES: Yes, what we did is there was a total of 804 vehicles that were identified as part of our up-armoring strategy. That's the wheeled vehicles that they brought north with them or drew when they got up in country. And so at this point the vehicles that they're operating, that they're driving, are all up-armored. There were a few vehicles that were put on heavy equipment transporters and moved up. The example would be, for example, the shop van, which is a large, essentially static vehicle. And it was taken up by a truck and dropped in position, but it was not operated on the way up there. So at this point, if you're in Kuwait and you're headed north up into Iraq, General Schoomaker's guidance is real clear: you're not going north of the berm, which means north of the border, in a non-up-armored vehicle, and that's our requirement. And so what you now have is an accountability process during the reception, staging and onward movement where every vehicle's accounted for and it gets up-armored or it doesn't go north.

So no soldiers will leave Kuwait without the up-armoring of their vehicles being completed. And the specific unit of the Guardsman who questioned Donald Rumsfeld was up-armored within twenty four hours of the question being asked.

There is no up-armoring issue, nor in my opinion was there one to begin with. The issue was created by a planted question by a newspaper "reporter" who wanted to make Donald Rumsfeld and the U.S. military look bad.

The remarkable point of all this "controversy" has been the fact that the Secretary of Defense would take unscreened questions from the men under his command. When was the last time you heard bin Laden fielding questions from the Al-Qaida grunts in Iraq? Have any of them asked him why the United States hasn't cut and run from Iraq or Afghanistan? The answer is the difference between America and her enemies. In America the military is answerable to the people; bin Laden answers to no one but himself.

If these allegations are true, then these men need to prosecuted to the full extent of the law. At a minimum, these men should be removed from the Senate Intelligence Committee and have their security clearance revoked until cleared by an investigation.

(From LGF)