Cross posted at the front page of My Left Wing.
I know my position on this subject is controversial, and that some readers will be surprised to hear me say this, but I’m fed up with listening to how only the “few” are sacrificing in our war on terror, and of seeing high profile columnists like Bob Herbert of the New York Times echo chamber this diaper dialogue to support their pet agendas.
Few people feel worse than I do for our troops who have had to serve two, three or more tours of duty in a war zone thanks to our end zone fumbles in Iraq, and I can understand why some of those troops are starting to complain about it. But when I start hearing about how unfair it is that only the troops are sacrificing, that’s where my sympathy ends.
What Did the “Volunteers” Think They Were Volunteering For?
I’m not fond of chastising enlisted personnel for expressing their personal views, but Sergeant X agreed to be quoted in Herbert’s October 12 column “Sacrifice of the Few,” and Herbert saw fit to identify him by name. The column is nested behind NYT’s Times Select firewall, but I’ll give you enough snippets to illustrate my point.
Sgt. [X] remembers the time, not too long ago, when he came home on a brief leave from Iraq. He was walking through an airport, in uniform, and other passengers, spotting him, began to applaud.
“It was awesome,” he said. “They were cheering and clapping. It was great. But you know what? I said to myself, `That guy’s flying to Toledo on a business trip. This lady over here is flying off on vacation. Their lives are normal. But soon I’ll be getting on a plane to go back to the most abnormal place on earth.'”
What Sergeant X and Herbert don’t seem to understand is that those other people’s lives are “normal” because those are the lives they signed up for. Sergeant X was headed back to “the most abnormal place on earth” because he volunteered to be in the business of professional arms.
Like everyone else in the armed services today, Sergeant X was not drafted. When he volunteered to fight wars, did it not occur to him that he might actually have to fight one? And has it never occurred to Sergeant X or Herbert that America finances a robust standing professional force in peacetime so that if war breaks out, the professional force will fight it and the rest of America can go on with its “normal” life?
[Sergeant X is] safely home after serving three nerve-racking combat tours — one in Afghanistan and two yearlong tours in Iraq. He’s engaged to be married and will receive a degree soon from [a nearby] State University. His commitment to the military, which he made while still in high school…, will end in a few months.
But there is a definite edge in his voice, an undercurrent of bitterness, when he talks about the tiny percentage of the American population that is shouldering the burden of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. “We’re nowhere close to sharing the sacrifice,” he said. “And it should be shared, because it’s only in that sharing that society will truly care about what’s going on over there.”
The war in Iraq is the number one issue in American politics and “society” doesn’t care about what’s going on “over there?” As for “sharing the sacrifice,” whom does Sergeant X think pays him twice a month, and spends $2 billion per week to “support” the war in Iraq, and financed his state university education and his fiancé’s engagement ring?
Can We Share?
Herbert didn’t let the interview end until Sergeant X endorsed one of Herbert’s favorite mantras.
He said that if he could wave a magic wand, he would make some form of public service compulsory. “You wouldn’t have to join the military,” he said. “But there are many other ways to serve. You could work for AmeriCorps, or the Red Cross, or Homeland Security. You could do something. It’s about social responsibility. Especially in a time of war.”
Much of the time, Bob Herbert’s heart is in the right place, but on certain subjects he has his head cross threaded up another part of his anatomy, and his advocacy of compulsory national service is one of his foggiest notions.
Let’s say we require every citizen between the ages of 18 and 20 to perform two years of national service. What are we going to do with all those kids, and how are we going to pay them? Do we not have enough bloated, ineffective federal government programs already? And how will having a bunch of underage drinkers getting underfoot at AmericaCorps or the Red Cross or Homeland Security help us win our war? Two words: it won’t. Does Herbert honestly think it makes sense in wartime to keep an all volunteer military and conscript everyone else to hand out coffee and doughnuts at the USO? That sort of “sacrifice” wouldn’t do the likes of Sergeant X any good, and it would horn in on Halliburton’s combat coffee service contract.
I’m embarrassed for Sergeant X. He comes across in Herbert’s column like he’s in need of a prescription for grow-up pills. But my embarrassment for Sergeant X is nothing compared to my outrage at Bob Herbert for exploiting a dispirited young soldier to promote Bob Herbert’s personal agenda.
Herbert does a grave injustice to the dignity of America’s fighting men and women when he hands one a crying towel and turns on the tape recorder.
#
Commander Jeff Huber, U.S. Navy (Retired) writes from Virginia Beach, Virginia. Read his commentaries at ePluribus Media and Pen and Sword.
This administration has no respect for the troops. I listened to Bastite testify that he left the military thinking he could do more for his soldiers out of uniform than in uniform.
I heard Rumsfeld complain about not being able to lower his budget because Congress would not go along with his plan to reduce the military’s health costs.
I heard Sen. Murray say the VA insisted its budget was adequate when the VA actually needed some 2 billion more. Too many veterans and their families have to fight every day for the benefits they were promised. I understand why Sgt. X is bitter.
Yet, the wealthy who sit around a pool and earn their living from divident checks still have their tax cuts while programs such as schooling for the children of our military are not fully funded and veterans have to travel several hundred miles for medical treatment at a VA hospital.
Perhaps we should have a draft – especially if we have a never ending WOT in which our military is expected to play a key role. Our present government doesn’t mind spending millions of dollars for a single bomb but does mind giving our soldiers what they need. Too, Cheney and Rumsfeld have not minded the spending to build mega military bases in Iraq that enriches KBR but thinks extra reinforcement for helmets that helps to prevent brain injuries is too costly.
I could go on and on but I know I don’t have the perspective of Sgt. X. I only have the perspective of an upper middle class citizen who knows absolutely no one who has served in Iraq or Afghanistan.
PS: I think public service in any form locally or internationally would be an enriching experience for any youth from 16 yrs to 22 yrs – even if a little partying happens. I believe in universal health care, too and am thankful for the social programs that have enhanced our standard of living these past 7 decades.
I’ll have to keep this short, but my bottom line is that no draft of any kind will fix the present inequities.
I don’t have the NYT subscription to get past the firewall, so I can’t read the entire column except for the snippets above.
However, I can appreciate Sgt X’s sense of a lack of shared sacrifice across the general American populace. From day 1, his Commander in Chief has made it clear that a national war-footing would NOT be necessary nor required to take on his self-proclaimed GWOT. The population at large was encouraged to go shopping. No sacrifices needed Mr and Ms America, those would be supplied by that small percentage of the nation who make up the active, reserve and Nat’l Guard forces and their families.
After 3 combat tours, if Sgt X is lucky enough to have survived and come back relatively whole, then God bless him, he’s earned the right to bitch.
…he hasn’t earned the right to blame his plight on the rest of the populace.
He needs to focus his disgruntlement on his commander in chief.
A majority of his countrymen have spent the better part of the last 4 years (including the 2002 run-up to the invasion) believing the propaganda and disinformation of Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, etc, all while going on with life as usual. A significant number STILL believe that Saddam had ties to 9-11.
Yes, his Commander in Chief and his cohorts deserve all the invective that Sgt X and others like him can muster. But the rest of the populace doesn’t deserve a pass, having allowed this to unfold and not doing more to end it.
…The public–and its representatives in Congress–bought a war based on untruths. At this point, it appears that most of “us” think the war was a mistake. That “we” were fooled by one of the most sophisticated propaganda/disinformation machines in history is not “our” fault.
Blaming someone for believing a liar is excusing the liar.
Now, if there were a way to take everyone who still backs Bush’s war and make them fight it and pay for it, I’d go along with it. But saying “everyone has to pay” I don’t buy. Heck, we’re all paying now, the economic hurt just hasn’t shown up yet.
And as I think I made clear in the article, I don’t care for the way Herbert used a young soldier to push his point.
As I also said, I think Herbert’s heart’s in the right place, but I think his national service idea is wrong headed. It will not achieve the goal of ending the Iraq war. If anything, it will be used as further excuse to dismantle the New Deal.