Posted on 09/14/2006 1:01:22 PM PDT by Chi-townChief
Republicans expressed anger this past summer when U.S. Rep. Rahm Emmanuel, D-Chicago, used videotape of coffins of American soldiers killed in Iraq for a political advertisement. They accused Emmanuel, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, of disrespecting American war dead for political purposes.
Democrats answered criticism by pointing to a Bush presidential campaign commercial which aired footage of a firefighter's corpse carried on a stretcher from Ground Zero following 9-11.
All of which brings up the delicate, painful but severely important matter of our troops, those American sons and daughters fighting in this war in which nearly 3,000 of them have already died and many ordered to remain beyond their scheduled tours of duty.
The administration has been careful to portray them as patriots making tremendous sacrifices for a just cause. But as we march closer to the federal elections this fall, the troops seem more like hostages in a rhetorical showdown between the two national parties.
A hostage is an innocent person being exploited for nefarious purposes. A bank robber, for example, may take a hostage in order to expedite his dirty deed and his escape. When the police show up to thwart the robbery, the robber grabs the hostage by the neck and shrieks from behind the doorway, "If you care about this woman's life, you better shut your mouth, stand back, and let me leave with a head start and my bag of money." The authorities have little choice but to let the crime proceed and the criminal get away.
Does the Iraq war feel like the same kind of hostage situation when Emmanuel questions the legality and morality of the war and supporters of the administration shriek, "Don't you care about our troops?"
Rumsfeld, Rove, and the neo-conservatives launched this war in part, they said, because Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and Saddam Hussein was somehow a party to, or, at the very least, was abetting the terrorists responsible for Sept. 11. On that basis — questionable at best — they dispatched our troops to Iraq to fight a war that's been going on for nearly four years.
When U.S. Rep. and decorated Vietnam veteran John Murtha, D-Penn., recommends ending the debacle and bringing the troops home, Iraq war advocates again shriek, "Do you want your sons and daughters to die for nothing?"
In one of the more egregious politicizations of our military youth, Vice President Dick Cheney scolded American voters who defeated Sen. Joe Lieberman in Connecticut's recent primary, for giving support to "al-Qaida types" instead of our troops.
The "support our troops" mantra is increasing in volume the closer we are to the election. But it is not reasoned argument at all but rather the act of parading of troops as hostages to defend policy or ram through political initiatives that might otherwise face defeat if not for the fact that our sons and daughters are being held by the neck.
To those like Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., who opposes the Pentagon's record $440 billion war budget for 2007, war and administration advocates shriek, "Don't you want to support our troops by giving the Defense Department whatever it wants? "
To someone like Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who suggests that federal wiretapping of U.S. citizens is illegal, they warn, "Don't you want good intelligence to protect our troops?"
To newspapers like the N.Y. Times and Washington Post that expose illegal or unethical acts such as the CIA planes transporting prisoners to secret prisons, they chastise, "Do you want to jeopardize our war on terror and the lives of our troops?"
To the retired generals who petitioned for an end to the war: "Don't you, of all people, support our military?"
To those like U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who insist the U.S. should follow humanitarian and Geneva Convention rules and ban all forms of torture: "Don't you want to use every means possible to support our troops?"
Afraid of being perceived as unpatriotic or of endangering or even offending our troops, many legislators act as if they have no choice but to let the administration do as it pleases.
But there are other choices, better strategies, for countering such rhetoric. They can seize control of the debate by clarifying just what really is in the best interest of our young men and women.
They can expose the administration's fallacious use of the slogan, by asserting that "support our troops" does not mean blind support of the president and the plans that put them in danger in the first place.
Instead, the U.S. will best support its troops by telling them the truth, by not using them for political gain and by bringing them home.
David McGrath, professor emeritus at the College of DuPage, lived in Oak Forest for 15 years. He is author of the novel "Siege at Ojibwa."
Politicians have been using their militaries as pawns for a long time.
No surprise this idiot is retired. Obviously another 1960s freak who refused to grow up. Cannot decide which is more amusing his complete ignorance of anything remotely resembleing a fact about Iraq or his arrogance in assumping his hysteric emotion based whimsy is someohow "fact". Your feelings are feelings Professor. Anyone who does not understand the fundemental difference between a fact and a felling has NO business picking up a pen and writing anything.
David McGrath is an idiot, studying to be a moron and failing.
Must be brain-washed hostages too. The keep re-enlisting.
This type isn't worth commenting on...
This guy's book, "Siege at Ojibwa," is described in a review as "custom published for college course" meaning it is a vanity press work.
But the showing of the firefighter's coffin was honoring his service to our country. The showing of the dead soldiers was to complain about having dead soldiers.
It's WHY you show the coffins that determines whether it is unacceptable or not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.