« Maximum Overdrive | Main | The Gay Rabbit Invasion »
Thursday, January 27, 2005
He Didn't Give His Life In Vain
Senator Pat Leahy, one of the shameful Dems who voted to confirm Condi as SecState, lost another constituent in Iraq on that very same day when 37 US troops were killed:
A Vermont Marine has been killed by a roadside attack in Iraq, the family says.
Sgt. Jesse Strong, 24, was one of four Marines killed Wednesday who belonged to a Marine reserve company stationed in Lynchburg, Va., officials said.
Strong's mother, Vicki Strong, said Thursday the family was told that he had been killed by a roadside bomb.
Strong had just graduated from Liberty University in Lynchburg and had attended one semester of seminary before his unit was activated. He arrived in Iraq in August and had been due to come home in March, said Vicki Strong.
"He had a love for his family and for Vermont," his mother said. "He missed Vermont terribly. He had a deep love for God and his country.
"He didn't give his life in vain," she said.
Maybe Jesse didn't give it in vain, but the architects of our disastrous Iraq policy threw it away all the same. How many more troops will "not give their life in vain" for this folly?
ntodd
January 27, 2005 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/25771/1737617
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference He Didn't Give His Life In Vain:
Comments
Jesse, along with thousands of Americans have enlisted since the beginning of this war. They didn't sign up and say "Mmm, i think i'll enlist, yeah, there's a war but i am not going to fight in it. it isn't my problem." These young people enlisted with the knowledge that they would more than likely go to Iraq and fight for a people who couldn't do it themselves. They went over there with the knowledge they wanted to give the Iraqi people the same freedom we take for granted every day. We have the freedom to condemn the war, we have the freedom to condemn the President, we have the freedom to make choices and we have the freedom to be FREE!!! So the next time you question whether it was in vain or not, remember that you don't have to worry about being shot for your opinions, however skewed it may be.
Posted by: cora | Jan 31, 2005 10:15:12 AM
cora - I know you'll never come back here, and note you did not leave an e-mail address (very courageous drive-by comment, given the freedom we have to express our opinions without being shot).
I find your view that you think the Iraqis couldn't have freed themselves to be arrogant and racist. We Americans are not the only people who can rebel against tyranny. What's more, you might recall that we invaded Iraq to find WMD. The shifting justifications don't help us in the real fight against terrorism, and we've made matters worse in that arena creating a new breeding ground for al Qaeda and others (and it ain't just me saying that, but our own government agencies).
Also please note I never said Jesse signed up without thinking about the consequences of his actions. I respect the decision of all our people in uniform. I don't respect the decision our Commander-in-Chief made in launching this illegal war.
As for expressing my "skewed" opinions, I'm extremely thankful I won't be shot. I'm not sure what that has to do with Jesse's death in Iraq, but whatever. Lemme know when Iraq really is free and maybe I'll be happier about all the death and destruction. Iraq still ain't free now, what with us torturing suspects, killing civilians, and still occupying their country.
Posted by: NTodd | Jan 31, 2005 10:32:57 AM
Jesse may have signed up for the military, but he trusted our government to respect his life, to use it well and only in dire need. Sending someone into harm's way for a reason that shifted with the evidence indicates his life did not matter. His life was thus wasted and belittled.
We did NOT need to invade Iraq. It was a war of CHOICE. The military has been pleading with the Pentagon for better assistance, more boots on the ground, more attention to winning the peace.
In all these things, they were ignored. People have died because of this callous attitude towards those in uniform. (If you notice, out of all the neocons, Powell was the only one who has served.)
Those of us who have seen the ripple effect of the Vietnam war remember the anguish of those soldiers who fought and came back to be blamed. We will not let that happen. All here honor those who are fighting for their lives under terrible conditions for a constantly shifting cause and with no exit strategy. But we are outraged in the way the military was misused for political reasons.
Why did we go to war with Iraq?
WMDs? none
Terrorism? No connection with Al Qaeda, but we have outraged the Muslim world, many Iraqis now hate us, and terrorists are training in Iraq for future endeavors. We have created more terrorists and our actions in Iraq qualify as terrorism itself to the innocents there.
Mushroom cloud? Saddam had nuclear activity cut short (by the Israelis?) and was unable to reactivate the program because of the sanctions which were working.
Saddam's mustache? Several people (me included in a BBC discussion thread) predicted when Bush was selected as president in 2000 that we would be at war with Iraq within two years. This was obviously way before 9/11 gave us a reason to stomp furiously across the globe invading countries. The reason for Bush is personal, unlike the rest of the PNAC neocons which is imperialistic. He is finishing what his wimpy father dared not, to shame Saddam for thumbing his nose (and also planning an assassination attempt) at George the first.
A person who rises up to defend our country out of love needs to has his life treated with great respect. This war, this government fails that test.
Posted by: ellroon | Jan 31, 2005 12:20:45 PM
ellroon - spot on.
Posted by: NTodd | Jan 31, 2005 12:36:24 PM
I did come back by and i did read what was written. And yes, i am courageous. I have my own view and opinion on why we are in Iraq. But that is the joy of living in this country, I can have an opinion. Yes, this war was a choice, so was the choice of thousands of Patriotic Americans who enlist to serve this country. To protect people like me and you who have opinions and differences. You aren't the first person and you won't be the last to call Americans racist or arrogant, but what is disturbing is that as a fellow american you think of us as arrogant and racist. But you can thank our forefathers for giving us the luxury of being arrogant and racist. I guess i would rather be racist and arrogant then oppressed and tormented and in fear of my life.
Besides, get over the fact that no WMD were found, the reason we are still there is so much bigger now. The Iraqis are dancing in the streets with joy because they are finally free to make choices for them selves. Until March 1, 2003 they didn't have that ability to make choices. There was only one choice, serve and obey Saddam or die. Hard choice to make. Personally, i would probably keep my life. But again that is the priviledge of living in a country were you don't have to worry about that.
Posted by: cora | Jan 31, 2005 4:22:23 PM
I did come back by and i did read what was written.
I stand corrected. I appreciate your providing your e-mail addy this time, and I hope you come back again.
And yes, i am courageous.
I'm trying to figure out what makes you courageous.
I'll also lay claim to being courageous. Everyday I publish opinions that are not the most popular in this country. People like me are villified by the Right, yet I hold firm to my ideals. I have marched against war, and am the child of a conscientious objector. I believe in non-violence, which takes a hell of a lot of guts.
That is the joy of living in this country, I can have an opinion.
Indeed. And, like you have, I can say your opinion is skewed. You keep saying this as though it's some sort of talisman or trump card. Yeah, it's wicked cool that we can have opinions. That doesn't necessarily imply then that our country is always right in what it does. Torture is wrong. Aggressive war is wrong. I'm happy we have free speech, but that has nothing to do with the Iraqi blood we have on all our hands. Mine, too.
Yes, this war
was a choice, so was the choice of thousands of Patriotic Americans who
enlist to serve this country. To protect people like me and you who have
opinions and differences.
Again, I'm glad. But I fail to see how our illegal invasion of Iraq protects us any more than our immoral war in Vietnam did.
BTW, I have family who served in Vietnam while my dad was a CO, and I have a cousin who re-upped with the USMC *on the condition* that they send him to Iraq (his commander didn't want to, but that was his demand). Don't think I know nothing about what patriotic Americans do in service to my nation--and don't think that not enlisting means we are less patriotic than they.
You aren't the first person and you won't be
the last to call Americans racist or arrogant, but what is disturbing is
that as a fellow american you think of us as arrogant and racist.
You aren't the first person and won't be the last to entirely miss the point and get upset by my calling a spade a spad. What's disturbing is that a fellow American holds the racist and arrogant view that Iraqis cannot win their own freedom. That we had to dole out liberty as though it were a treat for those we deem deserving of our favor. It is not a gift given: it is something that is taken from tyrants by the people themselves.
I guess i would rather be racist and arrogant then oppressed and
tormented and in fear of my life.
You are fortunate to be the former and not the latter. Alas, Iraqis are still oppressed, tormented, and in fear for their lives. I'm guessing you don't see much of that on Fox.
Besides, get over the fact that no WMD were found
No. Freaking. Way.
Clinton was impeached for hiding an affair. Bush lied to get us into war. I will never, ever, ever get over that. I'm dismayed that you think it's okay that we're there even though our President violated every ideal America has stood for since its inception.
The Iraqis are dancing in the streets with
joy because they are finally free to make choices for them selves.
There are tens of thousands we killed who are not dancing. And are they really making their own choices? Sure, they cast ballots, but we apparently still have great control over the government (witness the latest reports about the US getting Chalabi appointed as Interior Minister). The US still has troops there. We are building permanent bases.
As I said before, get back to me when the Iraqis are truly free. And the North Koreans. And the Pakistanis. And the Saudis. And Palestinians...
Posted by: NTodd | Jan 31, 2005 4:56:01 PM
I applaude you for holding firm to your opinions and views. you are right, that does take guts and courage. again, i applaude you for that. I am by no means saying that i endorse violence or war but in order to gain freedom sometimes blood has to be shed. Maybe we are wrong for trying to help a nation to gain their freedom. But no one helped us 200+ years ago to gain our freedom, so forgive me if i think that it is okay to help another nation have what we have.
there are also tens of thousands that Saddam's regime killed that aren't dancing on the streets today. Besides, we haven't killed tens of thousands. That is a bit of an exaggeration.
YOu think that it was okay for Clinton to screw every thing in sight and lie about it, using the excuse that it was his business? How can you trust someone who can't be honest about his own personal life. At least Bush made it clear that the information he received was not as accurate as he thought it was. CLinton had to be put on trial and face impeachment in order to finally admit he had done something wrong.
I also don't see you making a big deal about why we went to Germany during WW2, in all the wars we have fought, we lost the most men during that war. We have permanent bases all over Europe. But no one gets all bent out of shape over WW2. The circumstances of our involvement in WW2 were similar to the circumstances of our involvement in the Iraqi War. We were attacked by another country and we fought back to protect ourselves. Sounds similar to 9-11. Hmmm, maybe they are different. but if you ask my grandfather and my brother, i think the answers might sound strangely the same.
Posted by: cora | Jan 31, 2005 5:36:01 PM
But no one helped us 200+ years ago to gain our freedom, so forgive me if i think that it is okay to help another nation have what we have.
Except for those pesky French.
there are also tens of thousands that Saddam's regime killed that aren't dancing on the streets today.
Indeed. And that has to do with us how, exactly?
Besides, we haven't killed tens of thousands. That is a bit of an exaggeration.
Bzzz! Thank you for playing, but that is not correct. We have killed at least 15,000 civilians according to Iraq Body Count, and according to the British medical journal the Lancet the figure might be as high as 100,000. Of course, since we don't even bother to officially count those we killed, it does make it easier to dismiss it as a mere handful, doesn't it?
And of course, we did all this damage in a couple years. On average, we totally kick Saddam's ass. BTW, the US supported him up until the Gulf War, and the bulk of the people who were killed by his regime were roughyly 100,000 Shia whom we urged to rebel in the wake of the war. Then we abandoned them.
We have a lot of Iraqi blood on our hands.
YOu think that it was okay for Clinton to screw every thing in sight and lie about it, using the excuse that it was his business?
One intern while he was in the WH = screwed everything in sight? Talk about stat inflation. And yes, it was his damned business. I should never have heard about his sex life. Ever.
Starr should never have been given several years and tens of millions of dollars to keep his witch hunt going (with the complicit media fanning the flames of fake scandals). And how many people died because of Clinton's blowjobs?
At least Bush made it clear that the information he received was not as accurate as he thought it was.
No, he claims it wasn't clear and blames everybody else for his errors. Sorry, but that dog won't hunt: he and his administration lied.
I also don't see you making a big deal about why we went to Germany during WW2, in all the wars we have fought, we lost the most men during that war. We have permanent bases all over Europe. But no one gets all bent out of shape over WW2.
1) Many people in Europe haven't approved of our bases, even at the height of the Cold War.
2) WWII was clearly a fight for survival and has always been considered a "just" war.
3) We entered WWII only after we were attacked by Japan. We only declared war on Germany, their Axis partner, after they declared war on us.
The circumstances of our involvement in WW2 were similar to the circumstances of our involvement in the Iraqi War. We were attacked by another country and we fought back to protect ourselves. Sounds similar to 9-11.
Iraq attacked us?
Posted by: NTodd | Jan 31, 2005 5:59:11 PM
You have your opinion about why we are there and i have mine. So we'll agree to disagree. Again, hat's off to you for sticking to your opinion. But i disagree with you as do many other Americans, the same ones that voted Bush into a second term. not that it is a surprise to you. Again, that is the beauty of living in this country, we can thank our forefathers for that priviledge.
Posted by: cora | Jan 31, 2005 6:57:17 PM
We can also thank those who dissent for preserving our rights. As Carl Schulz said: My country right or wrong; when right to keep right, when wrong to make right.
Posted by: NTodd | Jan 31, 2005 7:04:36 PM
Uh...Iraq did not attack us. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. So tell me again why we attacked Iraq even before we had even gained a modicum of control in Afghanistan, or captured Osama (remember him?).
Iraq is one of many countries that have tyrants who kill their own citizens. Pakistan is guilty of selling nuclear secrets to Libya and other countries, and for a while may have been protecting Osama and friends. Why are they our friends?
Saudi Arabia supplied 15 out of the 17 terrorists of 9/11, has international madrassa schools that spread a virilent form of Islam, treat their women and foreigners horribly. Why are they our friends? Egypt? Uzbekistan? Sudan? Russia? The list goes on.
Did we ask politely if the Iraqi people wanted to experience democracy at the point of a gun? 200 years ago we were ready for democracy as a nation because of the Enlightenment. You can't force open a blossom ahead of its time, so the same applies to such an ideal as democratic values. Education, philosophical and religious support, a vibrant debate among the citizens involved.
Iraq has not gone through this philosophical leavening. They will either drift into civil war or accept a religious leader who will clamp down on the very 'democracy' we said we were introducing.
Will we have to invade again if they decide to go their own way and we don't like the way they have chosen? Are they truly going to be free? Removal of all the army bases? Removal of Halliburton's grip on the oil fields? Will they be able to refuse to sell us oil? Is that their right, or do they owe us now for us forcing them to be 'democratic'?
Comparing our actions to actions taken in WWII is bizarre unless you want to talk about how close to the Nazis we have become.
Posted by: ellroon | Jan 31, 2005 7:53:17 PM
Buy me stuff off my 
