Sacrifice, Past and Future
In my previous post, I mentioned the perverse logic that often accompanies war by which the ultimate sacrifice by troops is only valid and honorable if it's followed by more sacrifice.
Yesterday, President Bush said the following: "And the best way to honor the sacrifice of our fallen troops is to complete the mission and lay the foundation of peace by spreading freedom."
And this today from Andrew Sullivan, who's been a great read recently on other issues: "For the sake of the 2,000 who have already died; and the countless, innocent civilian Iraqis who have borne an even greater burden, let's do all we can to make this work."
This is a lazy and deceptively appealing line of reasoning that must be rejected. It is not only specious, it's dangerous---because anything less than the establishment of a utopian paradise on earth will necessarily fall short for those espousing it. This is the main reason Vietnam became such a quagmire; year after year, a succession of political and military leaders kicked the withdrawal can down the road by citing the "sacrifice that has already been made." Breaking news: in Iraq, there will always be another election. There will always be another "crucial milestone." And there will always be another "terrorist."
I don't think anyone could argue that our mission in Somalia was completed; we pulled out after the disaster in Mogadishu. Did that tarnish the heroism or diminish the sacrifice of the troops who gave their lives there? Aren't they among the most celebrated of American heroes today?
Yesterday, President Bush said the following: "And the best way to honor the sacrifice of our fallen troops is to complete the mission and lay the foundation of peace by spreading freedom."
And this today from Andrew Sullivan, who's been a great read recently on other issues: "For the sake of the 2,000 who have already died; and the countless, innocent civilian Iraqis who have borne an even greater burden, let's do all we can to make this work."
This is a lazy and deceptively appealing line of reasoning that must be rejected. It is not only specious, it's dangerous---because anything less than the establishment of a utopian paradise on earth will necessarily fall short for those espousing it. This is the main reason Vietnam became such a quagmire; year after year, a succession of political and military leaders kicked the withdrawal can down the road by citing the "sacrifice that has already been made." Breaking news: in Iraq, there will always be another election. There will always be another "crucial milestone." And there will always be another "terrorist."
I don't think anyone could argue that our mission in Somalia was completed; we pulled out after the disaster in Mogadishu. Did that tarnish the heroism or diminish the sacrifice of the troops who gave their lives there? Aren't they among the most celebrated of American heroes today?
posted by The Cunning Realist at Wednesday, October 26, 2005
16 Comments:
Excellent point.
I remember this quite clearly during Vietnam. Both Johnson and Nixon (as well as Westmoreland) spoke constantly about honoring the sacrifice that had already been made by not "cutting and running now." Of course, look at what it got us.
We're trapped. We can't cut and run because that would give up Israel. Like it or not, this is the situation for the rest of our lives - and probaly our kids' lives.
I fuckin' hate it...
This makes one really think (click "play" in the lower right).
Larry Miller on Bill Maher (click the video) said it best.
"We need a new tactic..."
You know, all the BS coming from Bush and his talking points cronies is the spin they say today, and it is as simple as that.
Bush has said a lot of things over 6 years (I include the year he ran), and you know what, he is doing or saying the exact opposite now; anyone remember his no nation building statements. These folks say whatever works for them at the very second they are saying it regardless of facts or anyone else.
Whether we stay or leave Iraq doesn't change anything regarding our service people sacrifice, past and present. We prefer they not fight, we prefer they were alive, but we honor and thank them, yesterday, today, and tomorrow.
This is what makes these statements so perverted. They are using the dead to save their own hide at this point in time. They aren't thinking about how to best solve the situation at hand, bring peace, and move on. If we look to the future, how much more money (~$6 billion/month), how many more lives (~2 /day) will be sacrificed doing the same thing with no different outcome, with no plan, no finish.
Leaving or staying doesn't changes anything; those already gone are gone, and there is nothing that is going to change that, and there is some reason, if only to wakeup Americans to what is going on. In that sense, they helped our Demoracy.
Last night on Nightline they talked about the difficult job the recruiters are having (that has to be the worse job in the world given how we got to this point, knowing the ethics of this administration). When it all comes down to it, these folks signing up will have to determine for themselves if the recruiters and our leadership is telling the truth, and if they are really protecting us. Bush will gladly sacrifice your kid.
HHHmmm, I wonder if making fun of not finding WMD shows respect for our service people... that pretty much puts things into perspective.
One of the proposed budget cuts to help pay for the tax cuts, oops I mean Katrina, is to reduce Pell grants for college students. Pell grant amounts are based on financial need. One more way to reduce the standard of living for the poor and lower-middle class; your kids can't afford college. One more group of our children who have so few options left that even the military sounds like an opportunity. My daughter's friend wanted to be a nurse. A Navy recruiter told her they would station her in San Diego where she would go to college. All verbal, but she is only 18 and believed him. She never saw San Diego or a classroom. This is worse than Viet Nam.
"Persist in the mission"...so that 200 will not have died in vain.
What if the mission itself is - a vanity mission? Vain, narcissistic - trying to sculpt other nations to reflect our own prideful take on our own so-called "democracy", a political form vainly self-appraised as supposedly the most perfect in the world?
This war is the definition of a war fought in vain, for almost too many reasons to count.
Not to mention - "They tried to kill my daddy." Revenge - the most hypocritical vanity of all. Sometimes necessary, but never excusable if carried to excess and left intentionally unchecked, immune from the eventual return of conscience.
Freudian block above: let "200" = "2000".
The logic of sacrifice (pain) for the sake of sacrifice (pain) is starting to bother me.
'To do the same thing and expect a different result is the definition of insanity.'
Are they going to dye the fountains red, a la Iran, in a burst of patriotic fervor?
Who knew the axis of evil was Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Rove.
Some shock and awe.
Must'n forget Bush, Abramoff, Safavian, Libby, Perle, Wolfowitz, Feith, Franklin...
Thank you Anonymous for that Paul Fusco film...I bawled my eyes out but it's important for us to see.
Cartoonist's representation of 2000 dead.
I have been following a site now for almost 2 years and I have found it to be both reliable and profitable. They post daily and their stock trades have been beating
the indexes easily.
Take a look at Wallstreetwinnersonline.com
RickJ
Great article! Thanks.
Thanks for interesting article.
Excellent website. Good work. Very useful. I will bookmark!
Post a Comment
<< Home