Cindy Sheehan
Cindy Sheehan has announced that she plans to run for Nancy Pelosi’s House seat if nothing is done to stop the war soon. To set the record straight, Cindy Sheehan has never represented the anti-war community.
She represents the disillusioned mothers community who jumped on the anti-war bandwagon only after they experienced personal losses. But before her son died killing innocent Iraqi civilians, she never uttered a single syllable against the war, and she didn’t care that her son was one of the perpetrators of genocide. Her son went to Iraq voluntarily; we haven’t had a draft since 1973. And now she thinks Americans will elect her to Congress and rally behind her? Ha!! Enough of these fly-by-night activists. You are either with us, or you are against us.
This letter has not been edited.
Remember the story about how the Lone Ranger and Tonto were surrounded by Indians and it looked like their doom. The Lone Ranger said to Tonto: "well, it looks like we're going to die together, Tonto"; whereupon Tonto replied "what you mean "we", white man?"
When Brian says "you are either with us or you are against us", my question is, "what you mean "us", my extremist friend?"
Posted by on July 15, 2007 03:18 PMHave you got a mouse in your pocket, Brian? I'm curious as to who you consider "us" as you seem a little more than just anti-Iraqi war.
And for clarification, are you saying that all American military personnel are "perpetrators of genocide"?
Posted by carl on July 15, 2007 04:23 PMI am all for Cindy running against "pelosi the prognasticator" pelosi has been in control of the house for 6 months and not one bill has been passed and none of the promises she made to her constituents have been realized. Talk about all blow and no go.
Posted by not here on July 15, 2007 05:26 PMActually, my understanding is that as a private citizen, she was always against the war in Iraq. Her son being killed in it was the catalyst, yes, for her becoming a public activist.
Just like many people become activists for a cause after experiencing a related personal trauma.
Posted by mytwosense on July 15, 2007 05:55 PMYes, devaluing the life of one's child for an opportunity at fifteen minutes of fame and a political career is the epitome of living the right way. Please Cindy, teach me how to turn my child into a dollar sign, I would love to learn from a master.
Posted by on July 15, 2007 07:14 PMI really haven't kept up with all that Cindy Sheehan has done, but she is leaps and bounds ahead of those poor souls who worship at the altar of President Bush. Tell what you have done to help get us out of the worst foreign policy disaster in our history before you start criticizing someone who has devoted herself to that task.
I expect that there indeed some intelligent criticisms one could make about some of Sheehan's doings. None of them appear in this thread.
Posted by Truth on July 15, 2007 07:32 PMFrom what I have read in these "comments" you guys would deserve sheehan as your leader in congress.
And I truely hope its your loved ones get blown up by suicide bonmber and not my family.
They can start with places like San Fransisco and Boulder and then move on the New York where people have already forgot what 9/11 was all about.
Cindy Sheehan, will fit right in with the other far left Dems. I had empathy for the lose of her son and respected her desire to find a way to end the war, however when she buddied up with Hugo Chavez, she crossed the line in my mind.
Now she is just another far-left loon and because of her actions and that of the "cut and run" Dems, more mothers have had to suffer the same fate as her. When you tell the enemy that they have won, why would you be surprised when the attacks increase? She has not said it but Reid has many times and they are both cut from the same cloth.
History will prove Bush was right about this war on terrorism. And the Dems will be seen for what they are, a remake of Neville "There will be peace in our time".Chamberlain, Can't prove it and have no evidence but history will prove it.
Posted by jgd777 on July 15, 2007 10:10 PM
Cindy Sheehan, will fit right in with the other far left Dems. I had empathy for the lose of her son and respected her desire to find a way to end the war, however when she buddied up with Hugo Chavez, she crossed the line in my mind.
Now she is just another far-left loon and because of her actions and that of the "cut and run" Dems, more mothers have had to suffer the same fate as her. When you tell the enemy that they have won, why would you be surprised when the attacks increase? She has not said it but Reid has many times and they are both cut from the same cloth.
History will prove Bush was right about this war on terrorism. And the Dems will be seen for what they are, a remake of Neville "There will be peace in our time".Chamberlain, Can't prove it and have no evidence but history will prove it.
Posted by jgd777 on July 15, 2007 10:11 PMLast time I checked, we live in the United States of America. Our country is bounded by the US Constitution, which gives people the freedom to believe in whatever they choose and peacefully protest as they see fit. I also believe people have the right to do so w/o being refered to as anti-American, unpatriotic, etc. If blind support of ANY president (R or D) is a measure of patriotism, then we are in serious trouble as a nation.
I dare someone to find one single truly democratic country where blind support of the head of state was required as it seems to be now in the US.
The only leaders that I can think of that demanded blind, unwavering support are Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Pol Pot, etc. Hardly the embodiments of democracy.
Posted by BO on July 15, 2007 10:21 PMBO,
When you buddy up with Chavez and Castro, then yes you are anti-American and unpatriotic. That has nothing do with who is President. or whether or not you are a loyal follower.
I am very grateful that there were no one like you or Cindy Sheehan around during World War II. Many mistakes were made during that war also, but failure or retreat was not an option. That generation understood no matter how many brave soldiers were lost, we could not "cut and run" These terrorist have but one goal and that is to kill as many Westerner as they can. There is no negotiating with them, or reaching a compromise. Either we kill them or they kill us!
Posted by jgd777 on July 15, 2007 10:39 PMI am glad that Cindy Sheehan is running against Nancy Pelosi for congress.It is about time that we in the Democrat Party have a face in congress that shows our true soul and what we stand for.
Posted by True on July 16, 2007 06:15 AMCindy Sheehan thinks the war was a mistake. So do the overwhelming majority of Americans. Sheehan thinks we should bring the troops home. So do the overwhelming majority of Americans.
What we really needed were more Cindy Sheehans in late 2002 and early 2003. That might have save us from the gigantic catastrophe that Bush has led us into because he has had the support of people like most of the posters here.
Do I support all that Sheehan proposes? No. But she is a much better American than most of the posters here will ever be.
Posted by Truth on July 16, 2007 06:31 AMjgd777-
More neo-con logic. I stand up for the US constitution and the rights that we ALL have according to it, and you pull out the old "anti-American" label. I don't agree with everything Sheehan does either-all I'm saying is that she has the same rights as everyone else in our country. I stand up for someone's constitutional rights, and you basically accuse me of wanting to "cut and run"(another one of those neo-con buzzwords). I said nothing about being against the war, or being in favor of Chavez or Castro, but somehow you neo-cons manage to drag that into the debate. Try to understand this (although I'm not sure you possess the depth to be able to do so)- just because I don't agree with everything Bush does doesn't automatically mean I support Chavez, Castro, or the terrorists. Nor Does it mean I disagree with all in the GOP. I know its a difficult concept for you and your ilk. To understand that would actually require thought.
Truth...you really need a hobby. Sheehan is no great American...she is just AN American. WE all have the right to spew our stupid statements wherever we are...look at your goofy posts...we all read them and laugh.
Posted by on July 16, 2007 07:25 AMIt's really a sad statement about our country that an ordinary woman moved to extraordinary actions by the death of her beloved son has been demonized by so many.
Sheehas is NOT a villain. She is a mother. A mother who lost a child that she loved very much in a war that she never supported. It's amazing how many of the "family values" folks were so quick to villify Sheehan for trying to prevent other mothers from having to bear the same pain she endured when she buried her child.
This nation has truly lost it's soul and it's conscience.
Posted by Thomas on July 16, 2007 08:51 AMrockymountain, i hope your family dies in a fiery auto crash, as you call people un-patriotic and then wish soldiers of families to die, i really think i should find you and kill you for treason against the United States of America , you rat bastard s.o.b. i really hope you die a slow death soon for wishing death upon American families by terrorist .
it really seems that you are a Muslim extremist on this matter and that you would be willing to strap c-4 to yourself and be a suicide bomber .... i really hope the feds find you and shoot you in the arm or spine to where you have to live with the pain for the rest of your life, crippled and unable to walk , as a matter of fact i hope YOUR mother dies a slow death as well
you the kind of people that America needs to send off to Cuba like the terrorist and be locked up in gitmo bay , and tourtured
so piss off and if i ever find out who you are i will turn you in to the feds for treason scum bag
Posted by hoimaha on July 16, 2007 08:56 AMRockymountain:
You are one pathetic, hateful little twit. Unfortunately, this country is full of people like you who have nothing but hateful diatribe to bring to the debate. One thing I am sure of...God, Allah, Bhudda, Yawe, Jesus, destiny, etc., etc. have a unique way of visting karma back on people like you. You should be careful in your choice of the venom you constantly spew and you also need a psychological assessment as well, for the kind of hate you have is like cancer.
Posted by Beavis on July 16, 2007 09:18 AMWorst foreign policy in HISTORY? What history are we talking about first Truth? American foreign policy? It's not even a top 10:
1. Failure to enter World War II and staying "neutral" while Europe burned
2. Entry in Vietnam
3. Bay of Pigs Invasion
4. War of 1812
5. Declaration of "Manifest Destiny" (at least in the eyes of the "rest of the world")
6. Exit strategy for Vietnam Conflict
7. American foreign policy in the Indian / Pacific Ocean (the somewhat "colonization and then retreat in the Philippines and Indonesia)
8. Delay entry into World War I
9. Korean Conflict
10. Iran - Contra
Posted by Dan2 on July 16, 2007 09:19 AM"Truth...look at your goofy posts...we all read them and laugh.
Posted by on July 16, 2007 07:25 AM"
Thanks, whoever you are, I've always wanted to be a comedian, and now I am one. I only wish I could somehow pass the hat.
Posted by Truth on July 16, 2007 10:39 AMHave it your way Dan2, the eleventh worst foreign policy in history. Feel better now? Of course, we don't yet know how "worst" it will turn out to be. It's slowly making its way to the top. Geez, talk about damning something with faint praise. I think you're just trying to make Bush feel better.
Posted by Truth on July 16, 2007 10:46 AMTruth,
I don't really want Bush to feel better or worse. I don't care about his feelings.
You may indeed end up being correct (although with historical comparisons, I doubt it) that Iraq may devolve into the "worst" foreign policy of all time, but it may also evolve into one of the best, depending on the outcome of this entire middle east conflict.
Should the Iraq war, eventually under a new administration, lead to more normalized relations with Iran, should it indeed stabilize the middle east, if it leads to recognition of a Palestinian State and the State of Israel by the Muslim world, and brings the World Community more involved with addressing issues that lead to terrorism, and unites the World in it's disgust of extremism and terrorism, who knows, maybe this will end up being the "greatest foreign policy of all time."
By way of comparison, should we continue to be mired in civil and religious conflict, be unable to assist in a quick reconstruction of Iraq, fail to influence Iran and Syria from supporting terrorism, abandon our goal of defeating terrorists responsible for 9/11, continue to represent a "cowboy" mentality in the eyes of the world, and not engage the World Community to influence and stabilize the middle east, this will be a terrible policy, one that failed in it's general mission, it's stated mission, and it's desired goal of stabilization and ending terrorism. But the worst foreign policy ever? Not yet anyway (and it does really hurt your argument to exaggerate a situation with no backing evidence. You typically make a resolute point with backing documents, but you didn't in this instance. Don't want you getting lazy in your old age Truth.)
Posted by Dan2 on July 16, 2007 11:26 AMDan2,
Once again Dan2 "the libertarian" defends his pal Bush - this time his disastrous Iraq war debacle.
Dan2, I'll take your foreign policy analysis under serious advisement, especially looking at your list of blunders - "Failure to enter WWII?" - what sort of blunder was that? We entered after a couple of years & as a result the allies won - so what ?
And the Bay of Pigs? That was an embarrassment to the Kennedy regime & weakened our relationship with Cuba, which was doomed anyway - in no way was this a "disaster."
Here's a foreign policy disaster - declaring war on a country that was contained by NATO & had nothing to do with 911 - in the process stirring up centuries old enmity & plunging a country into a full scale civil war. And in the meantime emboldening a sworn enemy (Iran) to the extent that they are persuaded to thumb their nose at us & proceed with building nuclear weapons. In addition Iran are further emboldened to ramp up support for Hezbollah in Lebanon - who give Israel a military workover & further destabilize the region.
This is an unmitigated disaster, Dan 2, because we have been weakened, our enemies have been strengthened & encouraged & the whole region - already unstable- has been vastly more destabilized. Why? Because your good friend Bush & co don't know history, don't understand history & don't realize what sort of "domino effect" stupidity in a volatile region wreaks.
That you pooh-pooh this as no sort of foreign policy disaster & put the "Bay of Pigs" up there as number 3 - shows me that you are either going to defend Bush to the death or you don't know that much about history & its geo-political ramifications.
Posted by drew on July 16, 2007 12:10 PMCindy Sheehan needs a one way ticket to Iraq so she can help all the freedom fighters,in her sons name.I'm sure they would welcome her with open arms strapped with bombs.Then she will experience the same thing her son fought and died for freedom.
Posted by Can I get an AMEN! on July 16, 2007 12:42 PMdrew,
Did you read my latest post at all? Do you know the historical significance of delayed entry into World War II, or what would be my number 11, the failure of the Congress to ratify the League of Nations, and thereby actually allow the rise of Hitler? Do you see what the Bay of Pigs has done still to this day, to not have normalized relations, or influence over Cuba?
Your very narrow view prevents you from looking at this policy with an open mind. To see the good that has indeed come out of it, but also the terrible mess this has led us into, because of a lack of planning for reconstruction, and not involving the world community with more over-sight.
But there was no defending anything in my statement. Just a practical look at history in comparison to Truth calling this the "worst foreign policy ever." With a much deeper look, we could say that the Truman Doctrine, which was implemented to contain the spread of Communism that eventually led to the cold war, and our involvement with Korea and Vietnam, or the 1947 Paris Peace Treaty that "allowed" the Soviet Union to "control" the lands it liberated from German occupation to Soviet occupation, thereby creating the World Power Soviet Union.
You need a history lesson Drew.
Posted by Dan2 on July 16, 2007 12:56 PMyes, Dan2, i read your post, and the fact that it made no sense, and still makes no sense, prompted my reply.
"To see the good that has indeed come out of it" - I'm all ears, Dan2, please explain the "good" that came out of our Iraq misadventure.
You keep throwing out the great 'significance" of various historical events/policies without saying what this great & mysterious 'significance' is. How, for example would our relationship with Cuba have been any better without the Bay of Pigs? Castro was embarked on his course way before Kennedy's misadventure.
And the significance of our delayed entry in WWII - pray tell - would it have ended the war quicker & lessened Soviet influence? Shall I guess some more?
And it was the punitive terms of Versailles that brought about the rise of Hitler, not Congress's "failure to ratify the LON."
And I'm not sure what the point is of your rant about the Truman Doctrine - was that the worst FP ever? Or was it Korea - or Vietnam???
Sorry Dan2, you're the one who needs a history lesson - or a lesson in getting to the point. You always say how impartial you are & that you're not "for" Bush, but mysteriously you always seem to end up more or less in his camp.
Posted by drew on July 16, 2007 02:20 PMSheehan has given more to end this war than all of the rightwing conservatives combined who sit here like cowards praising this worthless war, and worse, praising a President hellbent on stripping us of the very freedoms we are supposedly fighting for! Bush has villied America, increased our enemies and made us more vulnerable to attack than safer. Lets send the Bush twins to Iraq and see how safe it is over there! It's easy to defend this worthless war when you do it from your livingroom and shed none of your own blood. If you believe in the Constitutuion, the laws of America which Bush and his henchmen thumb their nose at, then you'd realize Impeachment is the only solution to taking back OUR country. America belongs to the 70% of us who oppose the war and oppose Bush too!!!!!!!
Posted by chick1951 on July 16, 2007 02:28 PMIncidentally, Dan 2, I see on another thread you're busily endorsing Bush's position on stem cell research - And a few weeks back you were vigorously talking up "intelligent design" as true science. For a libertarian, you sure seem to fall in line with W a lot. I rest my case.
Posted by drew on July 16, 2007 02:28 PMDrew,
Ok, let's look at this one at a time:
1. The good that has come out of Iraq:
-free elections
-removal and justice for Saddam Hussein
-liberation of a people
-removal of UN sanctions for the Iraqi people
-A gateway to democratic Iran (first high level discussions with Iran since 1979)
I am not dismissing that Iraq is a mess right now, but that is as much Iraqi domestic policy as US foreign policy
2. Bay of Pigs was a total mess, and strengthened Castro's hold on Cuba, instead of ending it. Total failure and allowed for his continued success
3. WWII - By the time the United States entered into World War II (and Roosevelt was not going to declare war on Germany, but instead the German's having been strengthened by their advances in Europe felt invincible, regardless of the United States stance), it is estimated that 22 million people had been killed. 22 million! If the United States hadn't waited, while we are not able to divine the outcome of potentials, it is fairly safe to say that earlier US entry most likely would have ended the war sooner.
4. We won't ever know what would have happened with the League of Nations, we never had the chance to find out. That is a HUGE misdeed.
5. The Truman Doctrine and the policy to contain the spread of Communism failed miserably both in Vietnam and Korea, and in combination with the Paris Peace Treaty and the rise of the Soviet Empire, shut out China from trade with the United States until Nixon in 1972.
I do take a long time in getting to the point though, don't I? I will work on that a little more. But we discussed your perception of my "siding" with Bush on his policies before. I think maybe you tend to read the letters that fire you up against the President and when I comment from a more, let's just say nonpartisan, viewpoint, because it is so at odds with your view, it seems like I am supporting Bush's policies. As an example (and I'll cut and paste from my previous post), explain how this demonstrates my "siding with Bush"
"...should we continue to be mired in civil and religious conflict, be unable to assist in a quick reconstruction of Iraq, fail to influence Iran and Syria from supporting terrorism, abandon our goal of defeating terrorists responsible for 9/11, continue to represent a "cowboy" mentality in the eyes of the world, and not engage the World Community to influence and stabilize the middle east, this will be a terrible policy, one that failed in it's general mission, it's stated mission, and it's desired goal of stabilization and ending terrorism."
I would not call that a ringing endorsement of our Iraq foreign policy.
Posted by Dan2 on July 16, 2007 03:21 PMDrew,
See, there you go reading into things again. I asked what the issue is with asking for more Federal funding on something that hasn't demonstrated any success yet, not supporting Bush position, just making sure people know that there is indeed Federal funding currently, and that industry has every ability to fund hESC. I think we should go with what works, but I also believe that we should abolish the NIH, just like a true libertarian. If you would have read my entire argument, you would see that I state just that.
As for ID and Creationism, I was, and you KNOW this, pointing out that ID and Creationism are not the same, and that there are many theories of evolution. (http://www.zmag.org/ZMag/evolution_1.htm)
That is all I said, yet you read WAY more into it. It is your partisan glasses that prevent you from even looking at anything outside of your thought process. You hindered vision is not the result of my libertarianism, but your dogma of your style of political liberalism. I am much more conservative than you are, but that doesn't make me a conservative, anymore than Hilary Clinton is, because she is politically right of Ted Kennedy.
As a conservative, I welcome Cindy Sheehan's entry into the race for Pelosi's seat. Any debate between the two can only be future material for GOP campaign ads. People across America will look at the left and see a choice between nutty and nuttier. I can easily see a GOP bumper sticker that reads: "No matter what you think of us, we're still the only people on THIS planet running for office."
Posted by neal5x5 on July 16, 2007 03:44 PMDan2,
OK - Saddam was removed - that is ONE good thing.
As for your other points:
-free elections
-liberation of a people
-removal of UN sanctions for the Iraqi people
How do these amount to a hill of beans when the bulk of the population is facing a life of more want, fear & misery than they did under Saddam? Come on Dan, don't be disingenuous! You sound like Tony Snow.
-A gateway to democratic Iran (first high level discussions with Iran since 1979) - the only "development" here is that Iraqi Shiites are getting material support from Iran to better smite their enemies. And Saddam's removal means that the Iranians' last great enemy is gone - and they feel they are free to do as they please - including thumbing their noses at the US. Has that made us safer?
2) Bay of Pigs - no impact on Cuba's attitude to the US - they were pursuing Soviet alliances anyway
3) WWII - how do you know what sort of difference in lives or duration an early US entry would've made?
4) "We won't ever know what would have happened with the League of Nations, we never had the chance to find out. That is a HUGE misdeed."
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. The league functioned quite successfully from after WWI until the late 1930s without the US participating.
5) Maybe the Truman Doctrine failed miserably in that it was responsible for the thinking that spawned Korea & Vietnam. However - don't you think the Truman doctrine was also responsible for putting political & economic pressure on the USSR that may eventually have led to its demise?
And, again, if you think that ID & creationism aren't just the same BS dressed up in different clothing, then you're a lot more gullible than I thought.
Good points Drew, and I am glad that you took the time to look. We may disagree philosophically, but we at least understand each position, and the arguments can be made. I think the Truman Doctrine allowed the Soviet Union to build militarily, and that economic pressure and the inevitable advent of instant world wide communication, as well as a Soviet President who really wanted to integrate with the West, is what lead to the demise of the Soviet Union.
The difference between ID and Creationism, as I understand it, is that Creationists believe in the whole Adam and Eve, the Earth is 6000 years old crap, and ID supporters believe that a superior power created the Universe and it's complexities and that evolution occurred to bring us to today. As an example, God created the big bang, and then evolution did the rest. Or at least that's what I got from it. But two very separate and distinct theories (or in the case of Creationism - Theologies).
Posted by Dan2 on July 16, 2007 04:51 PMWhat does winning mean? What do we win? If we are there for 100 years they will fight us there for 100 years. Look at the Soviet Union and Afghanistan, we are going broke fighting this stupid war which had nothing to do with 9/11 or real terrorism for that matter. the inspectors told us there were no WMD's but Bush had to go to Iraq anyway. It is about a large military presence and control of oil in the middle east. They have not finished construction so we have to drag this out until our bases are complete, because after all we have to fight them there so we don't have to here. And if they do fight us here we don't really go after them anyway, just ask Osama.
Posted by Michael D on July 16, 2007 04:53 PMI don't recall running across as silly and childish a post as those by Dan2 trying to compare the Iraq war with past problems.
Most of his examples are laughable, although none so much as his inclusion of Iran-Contra, in which no one claims a large death toll, the Bay of Pigs, in which 68 exiles died, and the War of 1812 in which 2,260 Americans and 1,600 British died.
And then Dan2 admits with respect to several of his unfortunate examples that we just don't what would have happened if we had done things differently. What Dan2 in effect is saying is that, "well, it's just possible that so-and-so might well have been worse". Such rank speculation posing as fact.
It's abundantly clear that Dan2 is not trying to be objective.
Whatever the outcome in Iraq, we know for certain that Bush make gigantic mistakes for which we will pay for a long time. Most people think the war on terror will last many years. It has already dramatically changed the way we live and do business. To make it worse, as Bush has clearly done, is indeed a disaster of huge proportions.
I use the word "childish" because what in the hell is the point? The only possible reason to claim other things were worse is to make Iraq look not so bad, after all. To what end? When someone brings up the fact of someone doing something wrong, we always have posters trying to defend that by claiming that someone else did something "wronger". Dan2 carries that specious kind of tactic to a new low.
Posted by Truth on July 17, 2007 10:39 AMActually, Dan2's post is nothing but trash. Imagine how insulting he is to our military people who are fighting and dying in Iraq to claim that it is less disastrous than the War of 1812 in which 2,600 Americans died, with no loss of civilian life. And less important than the Iran-Contra controversy; and less important than the Bay of Pigs in which 68 exiles died. How ludicrous can he get? Dan2 is just making up stuff to see if he can make Iraq look like less of a catastrophe than everybody else, except Dan2 and Bush, recognizes it is. What's with this guy?
Posted by Truth on July 17, 2007 06:12 PMHope Rides Alone
USA Sgt. Eddie Jeffers, USA (Iraq)
February 1, 2007
I stare out into the darkness from my post, and I watch the city burn to
the ground. I smell the familiar smells, I walk through the familiar
rubble, and I look at the frightened faces that watch me pass down the
streets of their neighborhoods. My nerves hardly rest; my hands are
steady on a device that has been given to me from my government for the
purpose of taking the lives of others.
I sweat, and I am tired. My back aches from the loads I carry. Young
American boys look to me to direct them in a manner that will someday
allow them to see their families again...and yet, I too, am just a
boy....my age not but a few years more than that of the ones I lead. I
am stressed, I am scared, and I am paranoid...because death is
everywhere. It waits for me, it calls to me from around street corners
and windows, and it is always there.
There are the demons that follow me, and tempt me into thoughts and
actions that are not my own...but that are necessary for survival. I've
made compromises with my humanity. And I am not alone in this. Miles
from me are my brethren in this world, who walk in the same
streets...who feel the same things, whether they admit to it or not.
And to think, I volunteered for this...
And I am ignorant to the rest of the world...or so I thought.
But even thousands of miles away, in Ramadi, Iraq, the cries and screams
and complaints of the ungrateful reach me. In a year, I will be thrust
back into society from a life and mentality that doesn't fit your
average man. And then, I will be alone. And then, I will walk down the
streets of America, and see the yellow ribbon stickers on the cars of
the same people who compare our President to Hitler.
I will watch the television and watch the Cindy Sheehans, and the Al
Frankens, and the rest of the ignorant sheep of America spout off their
mouths about a subject they know nothing about. It is their right,
however, and it is a right that is defended by hundreds of thousands of
boys and girls scattered across the world, far from home. I use the
words "boys and girls," because that's what they are. In the Army, the
average age of the infantryman is 19 years old. The average rank of
soldiers killed in action is Private First Class.
People like Cindy Sheehan so are ignorant. Not just to this war, but to
the results of their idiotic ramblings, or at least I hope they are.
They don't realize its effects on this war. In this war, there are no
Geneva Conventions, no cease fires. Medics and Chaplains are not spared
from the enemy's brutality because it's against the rules. I can only
imagine the horrors a military Chaplain would experience at the hands of
the enemy. The enemy slinks in the shadows and fights a coward's war
against us. It is effective though, as many men and women have died
since the start of this war. And the memory of their service to America
is tainted by the inconsiderate remarks on our nation's news outlets.
And every day, the enemy changes...only now, the enemy is becoming
something new. The enemy is transitioning from the Muslim extremists to
Americans. The enemy is becoming the very people whom we defend with our
lives. And they do not realize it. But in denouncing our actions,
denouncing our leaders, denouncing the war we live and fight, they are
isolating the military from society...and they are becoming our enemy.
Democrats and peace activists like to toss the word "quagmire" around
and compare this war to Vietnam. In a way they are right, this war is
becoming like Vietnam. Not the actual war, but in the isolation of
country and military. America is not a nation at war; they are a nation
with its military at war. Like it or not, we are here, some of us for
our second, or third times; some even for their fourth and so on.
Americans are so concerned now with politics that it is interfering with
our war.
Terrorists cut the heads off of American citizens on the internet...and
there is no outrage, but an American soldier kills an Iraqi in the midst
of battle, and there are investigations, and sometimes soldiers are even
jailed...for doing their job.
It is absolutely sickening to me to think our country has come to this.
Why are we so obsessed with the bad news? Why will people stop at
nothing to be against this war, no matter how much evidence of the good
we've done is thrown in their face? When is the last time CNN or MSNBC
or CBS reported the opening of schools and hospitals in Iraq? Or the
leaders of terror cells being detained or killed? It's all happening,
but people will not let up their hatred of President Bush. They will
ignore the good news, because it just might show people that Bush was
right.
America has lost its will to fight. It has lost its will to defend what
is right and just in the world. The crazy thing of it all is that the
American people have not even been asked to sacrifice a single thing.
It's not like World War II, where people rationed food and turned in
cars to be made into metal for tanks. The American people have not been
asked to sacrifice anything. Unless you are in the military or the
family member of a service member, it's life as usual...the war doesn't
affect you.
But it affects us. And when it is over and the troops come home and they
try to piece together what's left of them after their service...where
will the detractors be then? Where will the Cindy Sheehans be to comfort
and talk to soldiers and help them sort out the last couple years of
their lives, most of which have been spent dodging death and wading
through the deaths of their friends? They will be where they always are,
somewhere far away, where the horrors of the world can't touch them.
Somewhere where they can complain about things they will never
experience in their lifetime; things that the young men and women of
America have willingly taken upon their shoulders.
We are the hope of the Iraqi people. They want what everyone else wants
in life: safety, security, somewhere to call home. They want a country
that is safe to raise their children in. Not a place where their
children will be abducted, raped, and murdered if they do not comply
with the terrorists demands. They want to live on, rebuild, and prosper.
And America has given them the opportunity, but only if we stay true to
the cause and see it to its end. But the country must unite in this
endeavor...we cannot place the burden on our military alone. We must all
stand up and fight, whether in uniform or not. And supporting us is more
than sticking yellow ribbon stickers on your cars. It's supporting our
President, our troops, and our cause.
Right now, the burden is all on the American soldiers. Right now, hope
rides alone. But it can change, it must change. Because there is only
failure and darkness ahead for us as a country, as a people, if it
doesn't. Let's stop all the political nonsense, let's stop all the
bickering, let's stop all the bad news and let's stand and fight! Isn't
that what America is about anyway?
Sergeant Eddie Jeffers is a US Army Infantryman serving in Ramadi, Iraq.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------
***SGT Eddie Jeffers, died on September 19th in Ramadi, Iraq. Details
are unclear.