Rick and I discovered this morning that yet another young man whom we know well has volunteered to be deployed to Iraq. He will be leaving in January. Which spurred me to do some serious thinking on the subject of our young men volunteering …
My support for the war effort in Iraq has dwindled, for two sad reasons:
(1) Our president told us four years ago that America has to battle the terrorists in the Middle East in order to prevent the need to battle them here on our own soil.
So we are sending our troops six thousand-plus miles from our shores into a region surrounded by a vast sea of enemy sympathizers in order to fight a ruthless adversary, whose supply lines are easily replenished, and who wages war under rules that defy comprehension by the civilized world.
Yet, at the same time, we are leaving our own two-thousand-mile border virtually unsecured, so that those very same barbarians may enter our own country at will, circulating among us, and devising all manner of mass brutality that may eventually make the bloodshed on the battlefield in Iraq seem a comparative walk in the park.
It would appear that our president is intent on facing down the enemy half a world away, while at the same time issuing them an open invitation to walk, unhindered and undocumented, across our unprotected border, and
(2) I believe that we are fighting this war with one hand tied behind our backs. Men and materiel are streaming across the borders of Iran and Syria, and our attention is consistently diverted from addressing that critical situation – a diversion that costs the lives of both our courageous fighting men, and innocent Iraqis, every day.
With all of that said, I respect beyond words those duty-bound, patriotic Americans who see it as their calling to do their part in creating an island of democracy in a sea of Muslim tyranny, and attempting to keep the terrorists contained and off of American shores. They are truly modern American heroes, standing in the cross hairs so that you and I might go on with ‘life and usual.’
Because of the above considerations, I suppose I might be considered a member of the anti-war contingent. But, no matter my thoughts on the prosecution of this war, never would I consider entertaining a negative thought regarding the successes our military has achieved. And never ever would I consider voicing such a thought, in public or in private. To my mind, depending on the tenor of such a voiced opinion, that opinion would be tantamount to undermining our troops, at best, and treason and betrayal of allegiance and duty, at worst.
I ask the readers here to consider the following statement made recently by the infamous senior senator from New York, Chuck Schumer. Then ask yourself whether this man should be allowed to continue to occupy a seat in the American senate. I’ll comment no more, and leave the matter for you all to decide:
The violence in Anbar has gone down despite the surge, not because of the surge. The inability of American soldiers to protect these tribes from al-Qa’ida said to these tribes, ‘We have to fight al-Qa’ida ourselves.’ It wasn’t that the surge brought peace here. It was that the warlords took peace here, created a temporary peace here ... Senator Chuck al-Schumer, last week in an interview
I ask you, which of the following should be considered an American patriot, and which should be the object of criticism and scorn? Which possesses the moral high ground? Which is the embodiment of the America in which you take pride?
We're living in a Lewis Carroll world, where up is down, black is white, and criminals hold positions of power over heroes ... and have the arrogance and audacity to denigrate their heroism.