Thursday, August 18, 2005
A Note About Cindy
Deploying Cindy's Antiwar Army: "MoveOn.org is leaving nothing to chance as it tries to make Sheehan into a national icon. It supplied demonstrators with advice on media relations. ('When talking to reporters, it is OK to keep repeating the same message over and over. It may feel strange to do that, but the reporters are used to it.') MoveOn.org designed printable placards for participants proclaiming 'Dogs for Cindy' and 'Moms for Peace.' It directed vigil hosts to declare 'if you have pets your guests could be allergic to.'
'We're also asking that you bring pictures of children,' MoveOn.org requested, and it didn't matter 'whether or not you have a child serving in the military.'"
I think you would have to be a heartless bastard not to feel for Sheehan and other mothers who have lost children in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is an immeasurable price for people they do not know or care about. I grieve for her son and the others who have been lost or injured too. I read as much as I can about each of the soldiers lost so that I have a full picture of this war. I want to know the cost. I also want to know what we are getting for it. What seems clear to me that we will get out of this war is a safer world. I can't see it any other way. If a leader of a country is so backward as to kill his citizens, attack his neighbors, try to assassinate an American President, and make friends of our enemies, then he is our enemy. If that is so, and we have the means and the will to take him out in order to provide some stability for those people, I am having difficulty seeing the wrong in that. To say we are there for oil is to be silly, as we could have gone to a much more oil-rich nation and nuked 'em. We didn't. If we were in Iraq for oil, we wouldn't be setting up an autonomous government, we would be their government. If we were there for oil, we wouldn't be paying $2.75 a gallon right now. Another argument the anti-war folks make that doesn't make sense is that the Iraqi people are not better off. I have not seen any polls that suggest that they are not pleased with what we have done. There are powerful insurgents. Yes. I am not convinced, however, that the insurgents are representative of the people, especially when they are killing civilians randomly. When you hear soldiers who come home, which I also try to read a lot of, they say that the average Iraqis they came across were very appreciative of what we have done for them. I just tend to think that the soldiers have a better sense of it than do the anti-war protesters. Having said all of that, I also think we need the protesters. There needs to be a check on our government, and this is an appropriate one at this time. I just wish they had better strategies/arguments against the Administration. It is hard to take anyone seriously or listen further when they call our President the most dangerous terrorist in the world. That diminishes their standing in this check and balance. To say that these young people are dying and getting injured for a less than noble cause is a sick misrepresentation. I hope that someday Cindy Sheehan and others like her can meet some of the newly freed Iraqis and then they can tell her what her son did for them. Chances are, they will thank her for her sacrifice.
'We're also asking that you bring pictures of children,' MoveOn.org requested, and it didn't matter 'whether or not you have a child serving in the military.'"
I think you would have to be a heartless bastard not to feel for Sheehan and other mothers who have lost children in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is an immeasurable price for people they do not know or care about. I grieve for her son and the others who have been lost or injured too. I read as much as I can about each of the soldiers lost so that I have a full picture of this war. I want to know the cost. I also want to know what we are getting for it. What seems clear to me that we will get out of this war is a safer world. I can't see it any other way. If a leader of a country is so backward as to kill his citizens, attack his neighbors, try to assassinate an American President, and make friends of our enemies, then he is our enemy. If that is so, and we have the means and the will to take him out in order to provide some stability for those people, I am having difficulty seeing the wrong in that. To say we are there for oil is to be silly, as we could have gone to a much more oil-rich nation and nuked 'em. We didn't. If we were in Iraq for oil, we wouldn't be setting up an autonomous government, we would be their government. If we were there for oil, we wouldn't be paying $2.75 a gallon right now. Another argument the anti-war folks make that doesn't make sense is that the Iraqi people are not better off. I have not seen any polls that suggest that they are not pleased with what we have done. There are powerful insurgents. Yes. I am not convinced, however, that the insurgents are representative of the people, especially when they are killing civilians randomly. When you hear soldiers who come home, which I also try to read a lot of, they say that the average Iraqis they came across were very appreciative of what we have done for them. I just tend to think that the soldiers have a better sense of it than do the anti-war protesters. Having said all of that, I also think we need the protesters. There needs to be a check on our government, and this is an appropriate one at this time. I just wish they had better strategies/arguments against the Administration. It is hard to take anyone seriously or listen further when they call our President the most dangerous terrorist in the world. That diminishes their standing in this check and balance. To say that these young people are dying and getting injured for a less than noble cause is a sick misrepresentation. I hope that someday Cindy Sheehan and others like her can meet some of the newly freed Iraqis and then they can tell her what her son did for them. Chances are, they will thank her for her sacrifice.
