What have we learned after six years? That we went to war against a country that did not threaten the United States — a country that had never attacked the United States — and because of weapons that this country did not have, weapons that did not exist.
Let's hope we may finally learn how right Army Col. Steve Siegfried was when he told military journalist George Wilson why the United States must — in a time of war — have a military draft of civilians: "Armies don't fight wars. Countries fight wars. I hope to hell we learned that in Vietnam (we didn't, tragically). ... A country fights a war. If it doesn't, then we shouldn't send an army."
We obviously have not learned that fundamental truth yet. Totally violating the historically honored American value that an American war demands equality of sacrifice, this nation — without debate or noisy dissent — continues the longest war in American history waged without a draft and with tax cuts.
True, our re-elected president has asked us to pay no price, to bear no burden. In fact, Jim Lehrer of PBS's "NewsHour" asked Bush last year: "Why have you not, as president of the United States, asked more Americans and American interests to sacrifice something? The people who are now sacrificing are, you know, the Army and the U.S. Marines and their families. They're the only people who are actually sacrificing anything at this point."
The president's answer: "Well, you know, I think a lot of people are in this fight. I mean, they sacrifice peace of mind when they see the terrible images of violence on TV every night. I mean, we've got a fantastic economy here in the United States, but yet, when you think about the psychology of the country, it is somewhat down because of the war." OK, admittedly it's no threat to Churchill's "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, sweat and tears."
But it is too easy simply to place all blame for the tragedy that is the U.S.
war against Iraq on the Bush administration and their war supporters, both Democrats and Republicans, in the Congress. We, especially those of us who have opposed this war, have been too quiet, too docile, too ready to find comfort in our own presumed moral righteousness.
What lack of patriotism and decency permits us not to tax ourselves to pay for the war and instead to hypocritically shift all the burden for eventually paying the trillions it will inevitably cost onto our children and our grandchildren?
Where are the marches, the demonstrations, the protests? Does anyone doubt that if the nation today had a military draft — without student deferments — summoning to service the sons of senators, CEOs and talk-show "patriots," that the country's campuses, as well as its elites, would be on fire against the war?
I hope we have learned to heed the wisdom of U.S. Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., who carries the scars of battle from his combat experience as a Marine platoon leader and company commander in Vietnam, where he earned the Navy Cross, the Silver Star, two Bronze Stars and two Purple Hearts. Condemning the disengaged jargon of Washington policy-makers that reduces flesh and bone to abstractions, Webb was emphatic: "You don't send 'force,' you send young people who have dreams, who want a future."
Some six months before George W. Bush would order U.S. troops into combat, warrior-scholar Jim Webb wrote presciently: "Those who are pushing for a unilateral war in Iraq know full well that there is no exit strategy if we invade and stay. ... In Japan, American occupation forces quickly became friends. In Iraq, they would quickly become 50,000 terrorist targets."
I hope we have painfully learned to choose combat boots over cowboy boots.
To find out more about Mark Shields and read his past columns, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.
COPYRIGHT 2008 MARK SHIELDS
|
 |
Comments
|
4 Comments | Post Comment
|
|
Sir,
Another good article and, timely. I protested this war before it happened, but then, I am a reader. And I read Lawrenece on Arabia, and Lowel Thomas' With Lawrence in Arabia, and histories of the Mongols and the Ottomans. It is essential to my opinion that I have met many Arabs, Muslims, and Christian immigrants from that part of the world. Without doubt they are intelligent and determined, and their culture is battle hardened, and immune to fear. It is easy enough to say that those who fear God do not fear death. These people cannot be motivated by fear. And yet, they make good republicans. You can trust them at their word for the most part simply because honor plays such a large part in their lives. We honestly could not have picked a worse enemy, and they were never our enemy until we made them so. And Yet, I don't protest, much. I do not feel the need. The congress, and politicians always feel the need to respond to war cries in the affirmative. Lincoln voted to support the Mexican War financially even while pointing out that it was illegal. This war is illegal. But it points out what has always been the fact, that the war powers granted to the president really make him omnipotent. Lincoln was right; but no one wants to follow him into defeat by opposing a popular war. So, politicians for political considerations voted for it and will continue to do so until defeat becomes a poison we all begin to choke on. I think there is a reason they have not asked America to sacrifice. America is played out. We have given our all to have peace, and a chance for a life and an education for our children. We all have a mortgage on the American dream, and most of us are broke. We have given up our unions, our wages, our fringe benefits, and have often chased jobs around the country only to find them hop the Pacific Ocean. There is a limit to what you can ask of a population without them asking for just cause. As it is, they will sacrifice, and they do sacrifice to pay for this war, and they will see no benefit. This is not bad, but good; because the most essential quality to any form of government, or any form of relationship for that matter, -is faith. Faith holds us all together, and the anti warriors have come face to face with the fact that our government has no faith, is not worthy of faith, does murderous nonsense like this war without consulting the people, -and, keeps on without regard to the will of the people. All any of us needs to do is to wait. There is a critical mass to demoralization. The number of us who are demoralized grows every day.. Hurry up and wait. Change is in the mail.
Comment: #1
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Sat Mar 22, 2008 8:13 AM
|
|
|
|
President Bush is sixty years old and barring serious injury or illness will live long enough to see what historians and others say about his eight years as Commander-in-Chief. The examples of incompetence and arrogance are endless and it is the American people who bear some responsibility for the mess we pass on to our children for sitting on our hands while the Administration and Congress mortgaged our nation's future. Shame on us all.
As a veteran of the Army, I am deeply saddened by what has happened to our all-volunteer military. The Administration's policy in Iraq has essentially destroyed the concept of the volunteer force . Thus, let the discussion begin about bringing back the draft and in conjunction with that idea some sort of national service plan for our nation's youth. We have to again plant the seed of service to country in our youth so the mistakes and selfishness displayed by the baby-boom leaders of this Administration will not be repeated.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Jeff Beall
Sun Mar 23, 2008 8:12 AM
|
|
|
|
Re: Jeff Beall
You name reminds me of fellow I met welding on a big job once. This fellow was from the South, and I was sticking bolts, and occasionally helping to move deck so the welders could get at the moment connections. After chatting with this guy for a few moments, I asked his name, and he said: Beall. So I asked for his last name. Anyway, I have to disagree with you. I don't feel the least bit guilty about this country going to war. We are not given a veto on the actions of our government. They very seldom ask my consent for anything. I cannot demand that a deliberative body like the congress actually take the time to consider the consequences of any action. Certainly war, and a war on the other side of the world demands consensus. Where was the search for consensus? The press wanted war, but they always want to know where their next meal is coming from. Those who associate war with a strong economy wanted war. Who else? Those who wanted mindless, pointless vengeance? Have they not all had their fill? If you look at what has happened in this country, as a trend, it is toward less democracy instead of more. The house of representatives has limited their number arbitrarily so we have far less representation per person than ever before in history. Why? Why, if this is a democracy does the government not avail itself of the genius of the whole people? They have their think tanks. They have the influence of the wealthy steering them left and right. But where is the influence of the common mind? You can blame yourself for being powerless. I have not a bit of guilt. They did not care for the advice of sounder minds. They did not care for the calumny of history. They did not care for the suffering of humanity. They cared about what they could get away with. They robbed a bank I do business with. How does that make me guilty?
Comment: #3
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Sun Mar 23, 2008 7:16 PM
|
|
|
|
I am a veteran (Army, 22 years) who completely supports the all-volunteer force. But the Iraq war has shown us the downside of the concept. It has become far too easy for policy makers to fall into the trap of thinking "We've got people for that" when weighing whether or not to commit US forces to combat. Don't misunderstand me, I don't think anyone makes these decisions frivolously, but I also don't think many of our leaders really grasp the gravity of their decisions (or lack of them in the case of the Congress) at a gut level. One way to bring home this level of understanding is to think about the one person who is the most important, most loved person in your life. As a purely private exercise in intellectual honesty, assume that this person's life hinges on your decision. If you decide Yes, your beloved WILL die. Now is the cause for which you are deciding Yes worth the life of that person? Could you live with the consequences of your actions, justify them for the greater good? Because, make no mistakes here, committing our nation to war guarantees that people will die, and every one of those people is the most important, most beloved person in the world to someone. I absolutely believe some things are worth dying for and -- even harder -- making the people you love die for, but anyone going through the intellectual exercise I just described will see that such situations are extremely rare. Iraq is not worth it.
Comment: #4
Posted by: Tom Trenton
Fri Apr 11, 2008 6:42 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
