In a recent WDH Forum post Pat writes:
“My husband was in Iraq, he was away from home for eighteen months. You civilians have all these idea’s why we should not be there. I think you should ask the Soldiers instead. You know only what you hear and see on the news, not the good things. And what kind of support are you showing with all the crap going on. Pulling out of Iraq now would be a serious mistake. We need to finish the job now and get it overwith not argue about what you civilians think is right. Bush was for the Military , still is and has done a good job. At least he has the guts to face the real problem.” — Pat; WDH Forum
Standby responds:
“One of the big differences between the opposition to the Vietnam War during that era and the opposition to the Iraq War today has been the ability of people to correctly assign accountability for the policy where it belongs. In a representative democracy, leaders must always consider “what you civilians think is right” because that is the way the system is designed to work.” — Standby4321; WDH Forum
In spite of considering their “successful” opposition and undermining of the military efforts in Vietnam to be the defining moment and political model for over two generations of post-modern liberal activism, the liberal left did learn at least one important PR lesson: it is counter-productive among large numbers of the more main-stream population to be perceived as spitting on and denigrating the troops, and calling them “baby killers”.
Instead, the left now confines itself to spitting on the mission, at least in theory, somehow seeking to separate it from the men and women tasked with carrying it out. The mantra thus is, “we support the troops, but oppose their mission, the war.”
Another lesson that many thought had been learned from that fateful conflict in southeast Asia, is that politicians need to leave the execution of wars to the professionals (generals and soldiers), and stop trying to micro-manage the battlefield.
There is of course room within a free republic for discussion and debate regarding the relative merits of a particular policy, and for or against various strategic alternatives for success.
Beyond a point, however, the dim claim of “supporting the troops, but not the mission” becomes vacuous and hollow. How can you truely “support” someone, without supporting what it is that they do and what they stand for – especially when so many of those doing it, believe in their own hearts the utter nobility and necessity of that mission?
How can you claim to “support me”, if you are attempting to undermine at every turn, the success of what I am trying to accomplish?
I’m sorry, but if someone is saying that they “support me”, but oppose what it is that I do and have committed myself to, I do NOT feel supported, respected, or honored in any way. Those who make claim to such “support” are largely self-serving, perhaps seeking to assuage some deep-seated personal guilt for their philosophical inability to contribute to my success, and their own defense against a clear threat.
There are of course many soldiers now serving who personally do not believe in why they are where they are, and perhaps who do not believe that what they are being called upon to do is worth either the risk or the cost.
Perhaps it is THEY who feel supported in their desire to flee the dangers they face. Remove this cup from my lips O Lord. I hope for our sake, and the sake of their fellow soldiers, that they are in the extreme minority. Cowardice has many faces.
Every soldier would clearly much rather be home sipping lemonade under a tree with their sweetie, than sweating it out in the deserts of Iraq, or Afghanistan, or wherever – wondering if every passing car hides a bomb, or whether every bump in the road conceals an IED.
Yet they serve, mostly with honor, dedication, and distinction – understanding more than perhaps anyone the risks, hazards, responsibility, and professional duty of a soldier.
Relatively few now remain who did not voluntarily enlist, or re-enlist, with what at least should have been a full understanding that we are a nation under threat and at war with a vile, determined enemy – and that soldiers must often go to fight that enemy, in order to protect their families, neighbors, and communities at home.
The worst insult to a soldier is to undermine the successful accomplishment of his or her mission, whether it is through word or deed. The greatest affront to those who have died or sustained injury in the pursuit of that mission, is to render their sacrifice meaningless, by giving up on all that they gave so much to secure.
Everyone is “against” war. Sure. Who really “wants” war? We do our best to avoid that sort of thing, just as firemen avoid having to fight fires, and policemen avoid having to have a shootout with armed bank robbers – but every now and then, the fastest, best, and most successful way to get through an unpleasantness, is to face it head on.
In a republic (which is what our system of government is – not a “democracy”), it is absolutely true that political leaders are obligated and bound to listen to and consider the counsel of their constituency.
But as anyone who has served in such a post is well aware, it is impossible to “please all of the people all of the time”. At some point leaders must lead, and sometimes leaders find that they must lead in an unpopular direction, as Standby himself has had to do on occasion in his long and colorful political career.
The difference being, I’m sure Standby will be quick to point out, in those cases “he” was right, and those who opposed him were simply uniformed and misguided morons – if perhaps honorable morons.
Still, I’m sure that he must have felt personally “supported and encouraged” by such vitriolic opposition to his purposes and intent, and by blatant (and not-so-blatant) political efforts to undermine him.
Popular majorities are not always right – which is why we practice a representative form of self-government, rather than a communistic form of consensus-driven town-hall democracy.
If we did, we’d still be a colony of Britain, and slavery would still be practiced in a wide portion of the country. Few colonists supported the Revolution. Few people in the North supported the invasion of the breakaway Confederacy, either – considering it “not worth the cost in blood and treasure” – right up to the point where obvious military “success” began to occur and Lincoln declared it a moral battle of “liberation”, several years into the conflict.
A liberation that was, incidentally, fiercely opposed by a large number virtuous Democrats – for nearly 100 years after that war ended. Lincoln, after all, wasn’t a Democrat.
The soldiers now serving in Iraq and around the world, battling the forces of Islamofascist jihadism as they simultaneously strive to enable the standing up of free governments capable of defending themselves so that they can safely go home with the sense of a job “well done”, are doing difficult incredible work, under the most difficult of conditions, and with precious little support at home these days from those they ultimately defend.
With few exceptions, they do it with competence, dicipline, and dignity – as well as with a committment to those principles of freedom and human compassion that make them true role models in an area of the world where such things have rarely if ever been seen or experienced. They have fought, bled, and sometimes died – always with honor, dignity, and strength – and often shoulder-to-shoulder with their Iraqi counterparts.
In a society and culture where strength is admired, and irresolute weakness is abhorred, these are seeds of mutual respect and trust that, if nurtured, encouraged, and permitted to grow, will one day bear much fruit.
The news we see and hear in this country often focusses on the negative, the mistakes, the mis-steps, and the perceived lack of speedy poltical or military progress just in time for the nightly news cycle.
It’s purveyors are for largely selfish partisan and electoral reasons heavily invested in a pessimistic doom-and-gloom scenario of utter defeat and disgrace. They trivialize evidence of progress and success, choosing instead to steadfastly believe the mis-guided mantra that “we cannot win”, and in fact that “we’ve already lost”.
This is NOT a “waste of blood and treasure”. To believe, as many do, that Islamist jihadist’s fight only because we resist them, is simply foolish, delusional, and short-sighted.
By extension, their belief then is that if we simply do not fight, do not resist, and do not compete in the world with our own ideology of freedom and human dignity, that somehow those with a different world-view and an agenda of violent jihad against all that is “not Islam”, will somehow just fade away.
In five years of war, roughly 4,000 of our soldiers have died, and thousands more have been wounded, mostly by ambush and suicide attack.
That is barely more than died in a single hour on that day when Americans awoke to the harsh reality that violent jihad had reached our own shores – and far fewer than have similarly died in any comparable period of military conflict in our history – and perhaps any history.
Those deaths are not insignificant – nor are they “wasted”.
In long-ago Greece, a mere 300 stood almost alone against a Persian army of thousands, intent upon the utter destruction of Athens.
Had it not been for their heroic, ultimately sacrificial efforts, there would be no “democracy” today as we know and enjoy it, representative or otherwise.
In 1683 the Polish armies stood resolutely against an onslaught from Suleiman’s forces at the Gates of Vienna, and won, a devastating defeat for the Ottomans, from which expansionist Islam, psychologically dependent on military victory, never fully recovered.
We’re in this fight, and the quickest way home is to do everything we can to WIN it, and to succeed in our mission, wherever it takes us.
Several here like to sneer at such an idea – and some like to continue their self-righteous blatting about how the “war is lost”, “we can’t win”, and “it’s not worth it – we gotta get out, now!”
No suprise to many, I continue to rise in support of each and every soldier, sailor, airman, and marine serving or who has served – AND their mission in defense of this country, and freedom.
My hat’s off to Pat and her husband, whose service was and is a proud contribution to freedom. I know that the lives he touched while in Iraq are better for his efforts, and I hope he never lets anyone tell him otherwise.
