Those familiar with my writings know that I expend a considerable amount of time and energy analyzing the Iraq War and our nation's fight against Islamic extremism. As a soldier who has served in Iraq twice, and who has witnessed the wounding and deaths of friends and fellow soldiers, the war is a subject of deeply personal importance to me and to my family. But this time, instead of discussing the merits of the war or the consequences that our failure would have on U.S. national security, I'd like to talk about the men and women who volunteer to serve their country during one of its most difficult and dangerous moments.
A few days ago I traveled to Fort Polk, Louisiana to say goodbye to one of my closest friends as he prepared to leave for his fourth Global War on Terror deployment since 2001. We initially got to know each other during the first year of the Iraq War, working together during the day and sleeping ten feet from each other during the night. He had already deployed to Afghanistan once following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, and I was adjusting to my first expeditionary mission since I deployed to Haiti in 1994. We shared many experiences that first year, some filled with laughter, and some filled with tears. While we were growing closer to each other in Iraq, our families were doing the same back home. It is a relationship that has matured to the point where we, our wives, and our children, now consider each of us part of one big family.
After that first year, I deployed for a second time to Iraq while my friend left once again for Afghanistan, marking his third separation from family and friends in the course of just four short years. While there, he earned his third Bronze Star, which was added to his Purple Heart and the award for valor under fire that he earned for his heroic actions following a roadside bombing in Iraq that severely wounded a close friend of ours. One of the most difficult moments of my life was watching him scrub our friend's blood out of his body armor, not knowing what to say to ease his pain, and ultimately realizing that just being there with him was what mattered most.
Just before he left for his second Iraq tour and fourth deployment in six years, my friend and I talked briefly about his thoughts on the war, repeated deployments, and what it means to be a soldier. Some of the discussion was personal and will remain between us. But I can tell you that he understands why we are in Iraq, and why it is important for us to complete our mission there. He and the vast majority of men and women in our military are perfect examples of what it means to put service to the nation ahead of service to self.
Still, despite their continued willingness to return to the fight, I often find myself questioning what we are doing to those who volunteer to serve our country in uniform. And when I say "we," I am not merely referring to the defense establishment, the Bush Administration, or the Congress. I am referring to the country as a whole. Yes, we all willingly signed up for military service, knowing full well that we could be called on a moment's notice to put ourselves in harm's way, and that our time away from home and loved ones could be considerable. But from the very beginning our military has been fighting and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan while our nation has been conducting business as usual, largely unaffected and ignorant of the sacrifices being made on its behalf. It is our soldiers and their loved ones who are bearing the burden in this war, with thousands killed and wounded on two of the most critical battlefields of our time.
The health of the all volunteer force is in jeopardy because America is not acting like a country at war. As a nation, we need to stop the partisan bickering and recognize that we are facing a volatile and dangerous future confronting extremists who use terrorism to lash out at America's values and ideals. As a nation, we need to stop saying the war in Iraq is lost and figure out the best way to give our troops what they need, when they need it, to ensure America's strategic interests in the Middle East and around the world. And as a nation, we need American citizens to understand what is at stake and to stand up in defense of our country.
The American military is not some fringe organization disassociated from normal society. Our military IS America, and we should all be grateful that we have such outstanding men and women of character who are willing to devote their lives to guaranteeing that we are able to live in a free and prosperous nation. We are blessed that so many of our sons and daughters choose to serve in the defense of this country, and we should all be inspired by their example. That's one of the reasons I continue to serve as a soldier. I feel honored to be in the company of such amazing individuals, and I am humbled by the sacrifices that so many of them have made.
The Iraq War has bitterly divided this country, and America will feel its effects for decades to come. But I know that as a nation we will be okay because of the men and women who make up our armed forces. They represent all that is good and right about America, and they will see us through this difficult time. In reflecting on those individuals I have been fortunate enough to serve with, I am reminded of the words of a former Army Chief of Staff who spent nearly four decades as a soldier for this nation. General Creighton Abrams once said, "What this country needs, it cannot buy. It needs dedicated soldiers who see service to their country as an affair of the heart." I think General Abrams would be proud of my friend, and of all those serving this nation in uniform today.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 11
First, I thank you for your service to your country.
Secondly, nice piece. Well thought out and written.
Thirdly, what did Iraq have to do with the bogus "war on terror?" Additionally, why have we completely ignored glaringly obvious things such as our wide open southern border, Pakistan harboring al Qaeda and the Taliban, and Saudi Arabia continuing to fund al Qaeda, continuing to send funds to Sunnis in Iraq to attack our soldiers, and continuing to run schools that teach hatred of the west, if we're engaged in what is termed a "war on terror?"
Finally, will republicans find a way to demonize the war heroes of this war as they have those of past wars, when it becomes politically expedient for them to do so?
Agree that our borders are an issue and Pakistan is a marriage of convenience that is quickly getting old. The United States has a long history of working with less than desirable regimes when it suits our national interests. As for Saudi Arabia, the Saudi government, while not real crazy about us, is more worried about the spread of Iranian influence and the growth of Iranian power in the region. Their activities in Iraq are directly tied to containing Iran.
I would say that the war on terror has been badly managed, and is poorly named. Terrorism is a tactic that will never be defeated, but its effectiveness and appeal can be reduced.
What specifically are you talking about with the last statement?
You apparently haven't heard that the total number of so-called "al Qaeda" in Iraq never rose above an estimated 3-5% or so of all attackers against the US. By FAR, the VAST majority of attackers against US troops has been Saudi-funded Sunnis. Ooooopsies. There's that Saudi connection again. Say, weren't they the ones that supposedly attacked us on 9/11? Nah, can't be. After all, we're in Iraq, right?
"Even bin Laden has called it the central front in his war with the west"
First of all, when did you last speak with Bush's best pal? Secondly, do you speak Arabic? Thirdly, why do you think Bin Laden is so pleased that we're in Iraq? Did it ever occur to you that this is precisely what he wanted, so that he could use our illegal occupation of a sovereign Arab nation as a recruiting tool? Are you aware that global terrorism has risen exponentially since our illegal invasion?
Stop linking Iraq with terrorism. That was fraudulent from the start, and it's equally as fraudulent now. The so-called "al Qaeda in Iraq" has NEVER been linked to Bin Laden, and has NOTHING to do with the REAL al Qaeda, that is currently being funded by Saudi Arabian royals and housed and sheltered in Pakistan.
Btw, Bush was offered Bin Laden TWICE, and refused. Put that in your WOT pipe and smoke it.
"Their activities in Iraq are directly tied to containing Iran. "
They're (SA) activities in Iraq are KILLING US SOLDIERS!!!! And you're making excuses for it? WTF?
"I would say that the war on terror has been badly managed, and is poorly named."
It's a fraud, and has been since 9/12. There has NEVER been a "war on terror." There has only been a war on the American taxpayer, the American constitution, freedom, journalism, and rational logic. We've all been scammed.
"Terrorism is a tactic that will never be defeated, but its effectiveness and appeal can be reduced."
Not by randomly murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, shit canning our constitution, locking up and torturing innocent citizens, and raping the American taxpayer and Iraqi citizen alike.
"Finally, will republicans find a way to demonize the war heroes of this war as they have those of past wars, when it becomes politically expedient for them to do so?"
Every time a decorated war hero has arose over the past few years, to criticize this filthy corrupt administration, the GOP attack hounds from hell have risen up to villify them, whether it be a retired general, a presidential candidate, a former congressman, a current congressman, or anyone else. The moment a decorated war hero dares to speak truth to power, the entire GOP hate machine cranks up to demonize and assassinate that person.
It's a revolting, unAmerican reaction that, frankly, I'm thoroughly sick and tired of. The party that wraps themselves falsely in the flag, sends troops off to fight in illegal and unnecessary wars, screws returning veterans every which way possible, and then viciously attacks any war hero who dares to speak the truth. What a disgusting, shameful disgrace.
Thank you for your service. I believe that the soldiers are not getting a fair shake by this Republican administration. Congress is beginning to change some of the rules and deal with this. My representative doesn't think it is important but he won't be my representative for very long.
As for the loss of bonuses for incomplete time due to injuries, I just read in the last day or so that the policy was being changed and the soldiers would be able to keep their bonuses. Again, bureaucrats enforce policy, and sometimes public outrage is needed for change. In many cases it is not a deliberate attempt to short change veterans, but an inefficient bureaucracy at work. I see it every day at the Pentagon.
Your last point is crucial in our governmental system. The people always have the power to force change. Thanks for the comments. We often disagree, but I appreciate your posts.
That's not true at all. The military planners are not idiots. They know damn well what sort of casualities will be expected when entering into conflicts. The fact is, the BA and the previous GOP congress refused to provide adequate funding for returning veterans, and in fact, Bush has frequently recommended severe CUTS to VA funding.
"And bureaucracies are notoriously slow in adapting and solving problems. "
Who's in charge of the "bureaucracy" at the moment? Are you suggesting that there is NOBODY who could lift a finger to do what's necessary to help returning vets?
"I believe we are getting better, primarily because of the attention that has been focused on the issue. "
Damn liberal media.
"As for the loss of bonuses for incomplete time due to injuries, I just read in the last day or so that the policy was being changed and the soldiers would be able to keep their bonuses."
Only because of the damn liberal media, once again. Rest assured, if this horrific story hadn't broken into the mainstream media, this unholy practice would continue to be the norm, and I'm quite certain that it will return once the light has been turned off.
"an inefficient bureaucracy at work. "
This is a BS line. The fact is, everything to do with the government begins at the top. If you have an administration that believes in government's proper role, you have efficient, intelligent, effective government at all levels. If you have an administration that despises government and wants to destroy any inkling of "government for the people," you end up with agencies that cannot respond to national disasters, agencies that cannot reel in toxic pollutors, agencies that refuse to prosecute outright criminals in corporate offices, a politicized and ineffective dept. of justice, and a VA that cannot deliver critical needs to returning vets.
This is a pattern of THIS ADMINISTRATION, not of government in general. The architects of this national tragedy are PRAYING that you'll blame the "big, bad government" for these failures, so that they can further dismantle. They have created the failures. It is not the job of public servants to fail to serve the public. That is an abomination that only comes from an utter contempt for public servants from the very highest levels of government, and is spread throughout with the installation of incompetent, corrupt business pals to run key positions of key agencies.
"The people always have the power to force change.
This is absolutely critical.
And I'm not so sure that the VAST majority of attacks have been by Sunnis. Given their percentage of the population (about 20%) and the large number of Shiite militias, I would venture to say that it is more likely that there are just as many if not more attacks conducted by Shiites. And are you saying we should have attacked Saudi Arabia? Personally, I would have gone after Syria in any war on terror.
As for bin Laden's statement, no I don't speak Arabic. I am forced to rely on the hundreds of independent translations that have quoted paraphrased bin Laden's statement. If your translation is different, should I give it priority over all of the others? I don't know. Again, I don't speak the language. I suspect bin Laden is thrilled that we are in Iraq. He has long wanted a major event that could spark Muslim outrage against the west to overthrow moderate Muslim countries allied with or at least friendly to us. But the uprising he was looking for hasn't happened. And yes, I'm aware of the terrorism statistics.
If you noticed, I have said that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and was a questionable supporter of terrorism in March 2003. But that doesn't change the fact that terrorists have gone, and are continuing to go, to Iraq to fight the United States and our allies. I even mentioned that the bin Laden-Zarqawi link was probably a media ploy by the former to maintain relevance at a time when he had lost control of AQ proper. The association gave Zarqawi legitimacy and bin Laden relevance, but that's about as far as it goes.
I thought it was Clinton that was offered bin Laden twice? I've seen multiple reports that make that claim, and others that say he wasn't actually offered bin Laden, but had the opportunity in the late 90s to take him out and didn't. I hadn't seen anything on Bush. What's your source? I'd be interested to read it.
"They're (SA) activities in Iraq are KILLING US SOLDIERS!!!!" So are Iranian activities in Iraq, and Syrian activities in Iraq, and criminal activities in Iraq, and accidents in Iraq, etc. I'm not making excuses, but if you think SA is using the Iraq war as an opportunity to just take shots at Americans and not to contain the Iranians by backing the Iraqi Sunni minority, I think you're off base.
I would recheck your estimate of "murdered" Iraqi civilians. Even the UN estimates are not in the hundreds of thousands. And what about the fact that most Iraqis die at the hands of other Iraqis, and not at the hands of American soldiers? How can you just discount the fact that the majority of violence is Iraqi on Iraqi? You make it sound like our troops are just running around Iraq shooting everyone in sight. If you believe that, it shows that you have not seen the Iraq war first hand and that you are completely blinded by partisanship and hatred for this president.
As for the political attacks, they are just that--political. If someone is a war hero, this nation should be grateful for what they did for their country. But that doesn't qualify everyone who has ever served or earned a medal or performed bravely under fire to be an expert on military policy, strategic objectives, national interests, or intenational relations. And the GOP hate machine? What about MoveOn.org's "General Betray Us" ad? What the hell was that? Are you freakin' kidding me?
And to single out the Republican party as disgraceful is just ignoring the fact that both parties are equally guilty of revolting behavior. Comparing our troops to Nazis (Durbin), calling the war lost (Reid), accusing Marines of cold-blooded murder (Murtha) only to have them cleared in court, etc. It goes both ways my friend. Politics in this country is a disgusting business, and both major parties have blood on their hands.
And you can single out who's in charge of the bureaucracy at the moment, but you know full well that the bureaucracy churns along not matter who is at the helm. There are not wholesale changes in the people who actually do the work every time an administration changes. Your attempt to pin everything on Bush is just ridiculous.
The damned liberal media. It's not good enough that the problem is being fixed, is it. Always looking to take a shot? Are you really concerned about our military folks or are you just worried about taking shots at Republicans and Bush.
Government's proper role? That's the problem isn't it? Different people have different ideas about what government's role should be. It's not just what you think it should be. FEMA was broken long before Katrina. And I can't believe you brought up the justice department. The AG is appointed by the President and serves at the President's pleasure. Every president picks appointees that conform to their way of thinking? Every presidential appointment is political. It didn't begin with Gonzalez and Bush. Where was your outrage when Clinton fired 92 of 93 DAs so he could appoint his own?
I'm guessing you believe that a Democrat in the White House will make everything all right?