Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

A soldier's family speaks out ...

Posted by Joshua Holland at 7:40 AM on December 26, 2006.


Joshua Holland: And gives the stay-the-course crowd a spanking.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

Merry Christmas, happy Chanukah, joyous Kwanzaa, happy Festivus and a gibbous Cephalopodmas!

Perusing the paper this morning, still in recovery from that annual food-and-booze induced holiday stupor, I came across a potent opinion piece in the Washington Post penned by one Emily Miller, a member of Military Families Speak Out whose brother is serving in Iraq. She's neither shrill, nor does she pull her punches …

My brother told me that he takes his oath to defend the Constitution seriously and that he will fight and die if necessary to honor his commitment. When I asked him if he would be offended if I participated in activities opposing the war, he replied that it was not only my right but my obligation, and the obligation of all civilians opposing this war, to try to change bad policy. "Give us good wars to fight," he said. […]
For the record, he believes that the war on terrorism is necessary to deal with real threats facing the United States. He is not convinced of what Iraq has to do with the matter, which puts him fairly well in the mainstream of American opinion.
So it is terribly upsetting to me to hear that some people despair that there is "no point" to their soldier's death or wounding in the Iraq war. America does not have to be right in order for our soldiers' service to have meaning.

What I find offensive is the idea that we have to "follow through" in order to give their deaths meaning post hoc. It is dreadfully apparent from the Iraq Study Group report that Iraq isn't going to have a democracy in any meaningful time frame. Even if this administration does everything perfectly, the best-case scenario is that we might maintain the barest outlines of order.
Victory being out of the question at this point, the only democracy my brother is fighting for in Iraq is our democracy. The only constitution he is in Iraq fighting to defend is our Constitution. If my brother dies, it will not be for a mistake but rather because of his deeply held belief that the time it takes us as a people to figure out through democratic processes that we are wrong is more important than his own life.
This places upon us an obligation. My brother and other service members living and dead have given us the sacred responsibility to use the democratic means we have at hand to bring judgment to bear on whether any given war is worth our soldiers' lives.
Despite the clear results in last month's elections and the grim conclusions of the Iraq Study Group, we are still hearing intransigent rhetoric and seeing unrealistic posturing from some of our leaders. This is unacceptable.
It's not too late for us to honor the almost 3,000 U.S. service members who have died defending the principles of our democracy. It is morally imperative for us to honor our living service members and to do what is demanded of us by our democracy and by common decency. We have taken a small step by changing some of our leadership in Washington, but now it is upon us to follow through at home and demand accountability from our leaders.
What are you, fellow citizens, willing to do to defend our Constitution? Will you dignify the sacrifices of our soldiers? Will you honor my brother's faith in our system? Will you let my brother or others die to eke out a slightly smaller disaster in Iraq? These are the questions we face in the wake of the Baker-Hamilton report.
My brother is betting his life that you are not going to ask this of him. He has placed his trust in the idea that we will not ask him to die for anything less than the necessary defense of our democracy. Reasonable people may at one time have disagreed about the necessity of the Iraq war, but now that it has become abundantly clear from every quarter that we cannot win, will you be responsible for asking my brother to stay?
My family begs of you: Do not ask this of him. Do not ask this of us. My brother is doing his constitutional duty. Now it is time for us to do ours.
It's a very well-framed argument, cutting right to the heart of the insane argument that we need to feed more young people into the meat grinder in a vain attempt to justify the U.S. lives already thrown away in Iraq, a number that just exceeded the toll from 9/11.

Digg!

Tagged as: iraq

Joshua Holland is a staff writer at Alternet and a regular contributor to The Gadflyer.


Breast Flaunting for Jesus
The life of a failed California beauty pageant contestant gets even weirder.
Post by Thers. November 11, 2009.
Dobbs to Quit CNN
Dobbs, under fire, to seek greener pastures.
Post by Staff. November 11, 2009.
Under Pressure From Tea Party Activists, Charleston GOP Censures Lindsey Graham For Bipartisanship
Part of the fury from the right against Graham is being spurred by the oil and coal industry.
Post by Lee Fang. November 11, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Our nation let Nixon prolong Vietnam and Reagan fight his private war.
Posted by: Sojourner on Dec 26, 2006 9:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The pigeons of letting US presidents do as they damned well please with war have come home to roost.

Since W remains Commander-in-Chief and since his legacy will look better if he can dump his mess off on to someone else, in order to show how all consequences are awful, I expect the next two years to be just increased horror.

I never expected that one consequence of WWII would be the illusion that the US can only have "good" (just?) wars. Our governing class has always been "red in tooth and claw."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Social Contract
Posted by: NoPCZone on Dec 26, 2006 11:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I say this as a citizen and as a veteran (8 years US Army).

When a young man or woman signs a contract, raises their hand and swears an oath to defend this nation from all enemies & obey all legal orders from whomever is put in charge over them, our nation enters a social contract with them. It transcends politics, faith, class, ethnicity, gender or even law- it is an airtight moral obligation. Anyone, of whatever position or persuasion, that violates that contract is in my mind a criminal and undeserving of anyone's respect.

Unlike a civilian, a soldier is subject to double jeopardy under civil law and the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice). Unlike a civilian, Courts Martial are not a trial of peers as only Commissioned Officers sit on Courts Martial.
Unlike a civilian, soldiers must promptly obey any legal order from any duly appointed superior. Unlike a civilian, a change in moral conscience does not necessarily allow for a timely change in obligation or employment. Unlike a civilian, non-verbal communication and body language is sufficient to be guilty of felonious crimes. Such is the legal structure our troops submit themselves to.

They do it for us. Every career soldier and most first termers have a deep seated love for our nation and the values it represents. Duty, Honor & Country are more than a slogan, vision statement or advertising tag. They come home with a greater appreciation of what we are and what we have because of their service- not in spite of it. They work long hours in many times remote places under many times harsh conditions, separated from family and friends for pay far below the worth of their service.

Those we elect and those our elected officials appoint to positions of authority have literally life and death power over the people we call Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines. They are the keepers of the social contract between our troops and our nation. Many of these people have miserably failed our troops and our nation by using our troops as cannon fodder for a war that was based on, sold on, sustained on and continued by lies, deceit and ambiguity.

Ms Miller is right & I stand with her.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Social Contract Posted by: mite
» RE: Social Contract Posted by: NoPCZone
» RE: Social Contract Posted by: John Rice
» "Melting" is a straw man Posted by: brunowe
» RE: "Melting" is a straw man Posted by: Ian MacLeod
» RE: "Melting" is a straw man Posted by: John Rice
» RE: Social Contract Posted by: mirimac
How is the Iraqi war defending OUR constitution?
Posted by: Ellie1 on Dec 26, 2006 11:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I feel for you and your brother, but there is or ever has been anything in this war that threatens us or our constitution. Your brother is protecting big business, big oil, and this administration. We were never threatened by Iraq. You have been sold a lie. You drank the kool aid. I pray your brother returns safely. He is not to blame, George Bush is. I have been to a few veterans hospitals, and the emotional and physical toll of this war is huge. There is a special (and I hope painful) place in Hell for Bush and all of his backers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Our Masters and Rulers, Laughing To The Banks
Posted by: mite on Dec 26, 2006 12:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Illuminati, Council on Foreign Relations, Rockefeller's, J.P.Morgan, Tri-Laterial Commission, and IMF, World Bank.

These are the Masters that pull our Congresses Strings. You want proof-Facts not Conspiracy like they like to feed us through their Media; go too http://iresist.comcbg/bankruptcy.html www.infowars.com
www.devvy.com www.givemeliberty.org www.americanpolicy.org

Wake-up People!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

OUR MILITARY IS NOT IN QUESTION
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Dec 26, 2006 7:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I know of no one who does not respect our military. We thank God for them & worry about them. They act in the interest of all Americans and yes they take an oath that I have never taken. I don't question anything they do. I have serious doubts about our leadership and how they affect our military. Have they acted wisely? I think not. This is the problem I would like to see addressed. I do understand your point. Thank you, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"We strain out the Nat and swallow the camel..."
Posted by: ~Fiona~ on Dec 27, 2006 4:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This ancient wisdom seems true in this and with most of the other political and power based conflicts these united states have entered into since WW-II. It seems that it may be human nature to focus so intently on the smallest of things (i.e. the Nat) only to end up swallowing the camel.

War is that camel and no matter how intently we stare at things like the constitution, this or that "Act" from a dust covered book it does nothing to change the fact that our brave young men and women are forced to die for an illegal action.

Shrubb and the coconspirators in this are not people of honor, they are quite simply Monsters who care nothing of our rights and everything for power. So, when "we the people" struggle with each other instead of struggling against tyranny we only aid in supporting those who have no concern about our children sent to die for nothing. Let us no longer swallow the camel, but instead stare it in the eye and cast it out.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

clinker
Posted by: cottontail on Dec 27, 2006 8:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with most of what the lady said except when she referred to the 3,000 who died "defending the principles of our democracy". Invading and occupying a country that hadn't harmed the U.S. or was even a threat, has not a damn thing to do with democracy. It's all about oil and empire. Using our young people in their criminal enterprise should evoke outrage and a march on Washington and a courts-martial for the C. in Chief and his cohorts. Read Gen Smedley Butler's "War is a Racket" This idea of government of, by and for the people is really quaint. We have a government of, by and for rich people and large corporations, which continue to post record profits. And Congress refuses to take up the crime of runaway profiteering so common during war. Will corporate America ever release its iron-fisted grip on our governance? Don't hold your breath. Until then they'll continue to use our young people as cannon fodder in their perpetual wars.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All U.S. Soldiers In Iraq, Lay Down Your Arms
Posted by: rtfsqn on Dec 27, 2006 4:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ms Miller and NoPCZone both suffer from the mistaken assumption that a soldier is at the mercy of his superiors, who in turn take their orders from the civilian leadership, as if the soldier's hands are tied with regard to whether he obeys an order or not. It's true that soldiers takes an oath to defend our nation against all enemies and to "obey all legal orders from whomever is put in charge over them." The key word here is "legal." If a soldier is given an order to perform an illegal act, he is not bound to execute that order. Indeed, he is bound to refuse.

Given that this has been an illegal war from the beginning, soldiers are not bound to participate in its criminal bloodletting. Like everyone else, soldiers have been endowed with a body, a mind, and a heart, and military service does not excuse them from the responsibility of insuring that these wonderful organs of thought, feeling, and action be put to good use. A soldiers oath to obey those in the line of command over him is not absolute. If a soldier is commanded to perform an illegal act, it his duty to reject that order. Perhaps at the start of this war, its legality was in question. Many of us were taken in by the lies and willful deceptions of the Bush administration, and as a result believed that the war was justified. But this is an argument that can no longer be made, and it's time that those of us who are still giving support to this war, and to the human instruments that make it possible, put a stop to our continued, and now willful, denial of the truth. Anyone who today remains in this state of denial must now be considered as complicit in this completely unnecessary and unwarranted bloodbath.

I understand that most Americans do not want to hear this kind of talk about our troops in Iraq. But the facts must be faced, and Ms. Millers brother, as well as every other soldier in Iraq, must take responsibility for aiding and abetting the criminal regime they hold responsible for their actions.

It is quite common among the anti-war crowd to hear a person say that they are against the war, but that they support our troops. What does that mean? What does it mean to say that you are against the war, but that you support the instruments through which the war is carried out? It's time to withdraw our support from all these instruments of war, even if those instruments be our own sons and daughters, brothers and sisters. Certainly we wish that no harm comes to them, and I would hope that the same wish extends to the citizens and defenders of the nation we so aggressively and illegally invaded. But wishing that no harm comes to our soldiers and supporting them in what they are doing are two very different things.

The illegality of this war is no longer in question, and it's time that our troops in Iraq recognize this, and respond to that recognition with appropriate action. What is called for here on the part of our troops in Iraq is an open declaration that they will no longer be a party to any further killing in Iraq--an open rebellion against those in command over them who would make them complicit in the horrendous crime of this war, a war that would in no way be possible without them. Let them lay down their weapons and demand to be taken home immediately. This is not defeat. It is not surrender. Rather, it is each soldier's answer to a higher calling, issuing from the recognition that a grave error in judgment has been made, and resulting now in the firm resolve that they will no longer allow themselves to be party to the further compounding of that error.

I'm reminded of huge billboards that a certain well-known individual had constructed and strategically placed in various places in New York City toward the end of the Vietnam war. Those billboards contained a message that is as relevant today as it was then: "War Is Over If You Want It, War Is Over Now."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Imagine what we would have said in 1941
Posted by: Carl Street on Dec 27, 2006 5:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Suppose in 1941 Hitler had said, "It appears I invaded and conquered Europe by mistake; but now that I have done it, the German army cannot just pick up and go because we have a responsibility to ensure a proper government is set up before we leave."

I suspect there would have been few, if any, that believed Hitler and/or accepted that line of reasoning.

Think not? Actually, in many ways that is EXACTLY what Hitler did do -- he turned most of France over to the Vichy government; withdrew the bulk of his military forces; and attempted to negotiate a peace treaty with Britain.

Of course, we all know what happened then -- that old Terrorist Extremist Winston Churchill refused to negotiate and stated there would be no negotiations and that the war would continue until Britain prevailed. Interestingly enough, we could substituted Osama Ben Laden for Winston Churchill in the preceeding statement and it would STILL read accurately!

Think! about THAT! -- the key word is THINK!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» bobvz@cox.net Posted by: Robert Veasey
» RE: bobvz@cox.net Posted by: Graeme
America is over, get used to it
Posted by: mn on Dec 27, 2006 8:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All done. Closed for business. Collapse. Disaster. Economic tsunami. Buy cans of food and horde. Convert everything to liquid assets. And when the sh*t hits the fan, get ready to for the "cleansing time." Make your lists. Check them twice. Gonna find out who's been naughty and who's been nice. Hyper-Darwinism; prepare.

M.N.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A Major Point
Posted by: c&s mom on Dec 28, 2006 7:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As I see it the major point of the author's request/plea is that we use the democracy to pressure the government to change. That we stop supporting the funding of the war and back up those in Congress who vote to stop funding this mess. It will require backbone by our elected officials and the rest of us to take this step. The name calling will be fierce, but it is the only way to stand up and use our system to bring our troops home.

I cannot for the life of me see the solution of asking our troops to lay down their arms and be slaughtered as a viable option. I think it is again asking the troops to take all the risks and responsibilities to stop the war that OUR elected officials sent them to fight. It is OUR responsibility to push our Senators and Congresspeople to make it impossible for the Bush Admin to go forward. They can't go forward without money and the Governors need to halt the call up of the National Guard which is under their control, not the Feds. We need to call for this and support this if it is suggested.

Another tack would be a proposed law that any of our service people could not be forced into more than 2 tours of duty in a war zone. Cut off the back door draft, that will save our families and soldiers, airmen, marines & Navy from bearing all the burden on just a few people.

We need to starve the beast to stop the madness. To support the Troops means to get them home with their honor, that would be victory in the best sense of the word.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A Major Point Posted by: Ian MacLeod
» RE: A Major Point Posted by: Graeme
Response to original
Posted by: alternetrose on Dec 29, 2006 3:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Your note is heartfelt, and I hope your family member comes home safe and SOON! My brother was also in the military and left his youth and innocence in Viet Nam. Some of his courages brothers banned together to halt that atrocity and the end of that war began in earnest when soldiers spoke up - make that stood up to the atrocities being committed by the USA in the name of defense. At that time we also had the wonderful (scorned) hippies who shouted and marched, to "Make Peace Not War", more than just a cute slogan.

Today we have a handful of soldiers, some ready to be tried by military peers and sent to prison for protesting what they feel are criminal acts asked of them. Courages men and women who have very little activism working on their behalf - yet they served until their souls said - this is wrong. Most of us believe this too, but we are not supporting them for their "service" to our country and all humanity for the stance they have taken. Why not? We have a few thousand civilians who come to protest at various organized locations, calling for an end to this war, and some for Impeachment, also. Why not millions? While this war mirrors so much of what happened in Viet Nam, and while we have not connected those dots close enough, the horror of history continues to repeat itself. I think Americans are lazy and too easily, this time around, to ignore what is happening elsewhere because our soldiers are voluntary. IF there were a draft, this war would be over before the calendar could reach 2007! Since there is no draft, until, unless, each and everyone who desires the troops to come home and or, believes our Commander-In-Chief must be held accountable, actually protest - the good old fashioned way, we must not contemplate "a change of course." We are the answer to solving this mess. We are The People, and we must show our government that we decide what they do in our country's name. It isn't hard to find where the next group of organized protestors will meet. Most coming up are in Washington DC during Jan. Be there - or shut-up and continue to pay your taxes and lose your civil liberties and let your kids pay an even bigger price for your lack of initiative. This blog, and others, will not end the war. It will take a massive physical presence of Americans meeting in the same place, demanding an end to the war and calling for the redeployment of our troops. See in you DC?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: esponse to original Posted by: Ian MacLeod