Jon Krakauer Disappoints (Part III)

I am not condoning the lying and deceit that the military uses, but when opponents are using these techniques it leaves the U.S. little choice in the matter. Is Krakauer just as critical of the Obama administration misinformation, deceit, illegalities, hypocrisy, and propaganda in the Benghazi cover up, the targeting of journalists by the DOJ, the targeting of conservatives by the IRS, and the failure of Fast and Furious by the DEA? How about Bill Clinton lying about his intermarital affairs? I strongly doubt it.

War is a terrible thing and unfortunately civilians are going to die and troops are going to die from friendly fire. One philosophy I live true to in life is never to judge military blunders without putting yourself in their shoes. If I was in the military fighting in Iraq, I know I would be scared and have an itchy trigger finger. Krakauer tries to judge several unfortunate military mistakes in the book. I wonder how he would have acted if he were in the same position as those that made these critical errors? It is a known fact that the probability of critical errors are much more likely to happen in a combat situation than any other stressful situation that may face Americans. So it is unfair, in my judgment, to assume military mistakes and errors should not happen because we may compare and contrast them to what may happen in everyday life. War is not everyday life, so this is not fair.

Krakauer criticizes the use of Afghanistan nationals to block off the escape of bin Laden to Pakistan from Tora Bora because a bin Laden sympathizer helped him escape. No one understands the terrain, trails, and escape routes better than Afghans so that was a logical choice. What was not a logical choice was the Afghan government agreeing to a 24 hour cease fire giving bin Laden a window to escape. But Krakauer lives in a fantasy world if he believes that Clinton or Gore would have handled the situation on Tora Bora any better. In fact, would they even have the fortitude to stomach a battle, conflict, or war at all?

After the Tillman cover up was uncovered the Army did very little to punish or reprimand those involved in the incident. Still, the consequences were much more severe than those dished out by the Obama administration over his above mentioned scandals (nothing). When asked, the White House immediately turned over all correspondence covering the Tillman saga immediately (although Krakauer wrongly assumes they failed to hand over all documents – this was never proved). Today, the Congressional oversight committee is still trying get all documents related to the Benghazi cover up – nearly 5 years later. Krakauer was obviously angered by the Tillman cover up especially when everyone went on with their business after Tillman’s death like nothing happened. This reeks of Hillary Clinton proclaiming “What does it matter?” when asked to provide further details of the Benghazi killings. My point is that Tillman’s death is not a Republican or Democrat issue or a conservative or liberal one as Krakauer writings insist. It is a political one, and Krakauer did not have to reveal his blatant bias to write the book. It comes off as being bitter and insincere. Krakauer’s motives are clear and they are not any different than those using misinformation and propaganda to explain the death of Tillman.