Organizing for America | Blue Star Families, Blue Star Families www.bsf4o.com

Death never 'in vain' by Kathy Roth-Douquet

By Heidi & Blue Star Families, Blue Star Voices - Oct 1st, 2008 at 2:11 pm EDT

Also listed in: 10 groups

Death never 'in vain'

Policy decisions can't tarnish a soldier's ultimate sacrifice. This act of faith for American ideals is what matters and should be revered, whatever the war and no matter the outcome.

By Kathy Roth-Douquet

Originally published in USA Today http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2006/10/death_never_in_.html

Died in vain?

President Bush wants to stay the course in Iraq so that those who have died there will not have died "in vain." Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan urges us to pull out immediately to prevent more Americans from dying in vain.

Bush and Sheehan have both got it wrong.

Too many partisans in the battle for Iraq policy have used soldiers' deaths as a football in a bid to score points. It's cruel (imagine being a family member and being told the death of your loved one was in vain), but even more, it's just wrong. Those who argue that a soldier's death has meaning only if the politics are "right" misunderstand military service in America.

"We think of Kristian (Menchaca) as a hero," says Sylvia Grice of her cousin, 23, one of the soldiers kidnapped, tortured and killed by insurgents last June in Iraq. "He didn't have to do this. He believed in what he was doing." The terrible death's meaning, in other words, came from the soldier's commitment. It is his commitment that gives his life meaning, and even his country's possible errors staying in too long, leaving too early can't take that meaning from him.

The phrase "died in vain" comes to us from our great moralist president, Abraham Lincoln. In Gettysburg's graveyard, Lincoln urged the gathered to fight on for the survival of the United States so that those interred in that ground would not have died in vain. He did not argue that a soldier who loses his battle or his war has died in vain. Instead, he noted that America itself its ideas and ideals is what gives the soldier's life meaning.

Behind the sacrifices

So where does the meaning of military sacrifice come from?

Military service in America flows from our Constitution as a covenant among free people. The parties to this sacred contract are, on one hand, a group of citizens who assent to bear arms for their country for a time, and on the other, the rest of us, the civilians whose task it is to decide whether to send our compatriots into peril. Those bearing arms promise to bring their loyalty, skill and honor to the task; the civilians, for their part, promise to weigh the fate of those soldiers with seriousness and care, and provide the support necessary to those who go.

The meaning in the lives of those who bear arms resides in their loyalty to the democracy that sends them, and the skill and honor they bring to their task. If the civilians who send them falter in their decision-making, it dishonors those who steer and not those who serve.

So let's apply this to the war in Iraq. What if the war is a mistake, or we pull out too early? Are the deaths then for naught?

From the standpoint of a soldier or Marine, or in my case, a Marine's wife, the answer to these questions must be no. Why? Because despite any partisan's passion for the rightness of a position, none of us will know how right or wrong we really are until long after the last shot is fired. So we make decisions the way one does in a self-governing society of 300 million cantankerous souls: imperfectly, inelegantly, with unnecessary suffering.

Whether we are led by Democratic presidents or Republican ones great men such as Franklin D. Roosevelt or middling men such as Warren G. Harding there will be mistakes, judged differently at different times in history and perhaps never resolved utterly in consensus. Even in the "good war," there were bad engagements, bad decisions, unnecessary, sad, tragic deaths.

Service, then, is even more ennobling because it represents an act of faith in an unwieldy system a representative democracy of human beings. The weakness of our system lends poignancy to the decision to serve: Those who go into harm's way recognize that our society is in many ways deeply flawed, but to paraphrase Winston Churchill, it's the best one available yet.

Bad policy can't tar a soldier

Philosopher Nancy Sherman says the military resolves this tension by adopting a version of the ancient Stoic philosophy, which holds that one may be judged only by the rightness or wrongness of one's own acts, not by the acts of others. A soldier who does his portion morally and well cannot be tarred by the brush of a leader's bad policy. This does not mean that some individuals' willingness to serve translates into a blank check for irresponsible policy if anything it requires us to constantly scrutinize our policy and commit to do better.

In complicated times like these, it's important to remember that self-government is perishable it can be killed not only by enemies outside the gate, but also by indifference and alienation within. The decision to serve is a decision to be part of our country and, ideally, to make the part one touches the best possible. This is what has value, so that even in the tragic cases of friendly fire, or accidental deaths or deaths in battles later lost, those who die did not die in vain. They died in service to an ideal Lincoln's ideal that the government of the people, by the people and for the people shall not perish from the face of this earth.

There is nothing vain about that.

Kathy Roth-Douquet is the co-author, with Frank Schaeffer, of AWOL: The Unexcused Absence of America's Upper Classes from Military Service and How It Hurts Our Country. She lives on a military base in South Carolina.

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (1) | Report Objectionable Content

Dear Senator McCain by Ann-Marie McWilliams

By Heidi & Blue Star Families, Blue Star Voices - Sep 29th, 2008 at 3:04 pm EDT

Also listed in: 9 groups

Dear Senator McCain by Ann-Marie McWilliams

When my son swore his oath to the U.S. Military, he joined something larger, nobler than himself. Whether I wanted to or not, I became part of something larger too, the military "family". To cope with my son's deployment to Iraq, I began volunteering with two organizations dedicated to supporting our troops.

I am troubled by an unspoken rule within one of these organizations, that absent an unequivocal 100% blind faith buy-in to the actions in Iraq, I am not a Patriot, I am an "enemy". How absurd is this, while my son serves alongside yours, and I am here working shoulder to shoulder with you?

Through my volunteer work, I have the opportunity to speak to men and women from all branches of the service. Resoundingly they speak of the seriousness under which they took their oath, completing their orders to the best of their ability, and their passion to fight, work, and protect their comrades. Compelling them is the fundamental basis of brotherhood, leaving all politics aside.

My support of our troops follows that of a more basic nature as well; Motherhood. Your son/daughter is now mine. Every action I take is to see that our children are provided for, protected, and receive the veterans benefits they deserve. The polarization I find within the "family" runs anathema to what our children exemplify every day: unity. This skewed view of patriotism that I encounter rends the fabric of our family. Screaming "Victory at all costs" while waving a flag shows a lack of understanding of what our children, our military's objective is. We "won" the war in Iraq:
Saddam's Republican Guard ran for the hills, and we marched in without opposition. This was a resounding success, and in no way then or now could our military be deemed as failing in its mission.

I wish never for my son to return to Iraq. As a parent, I wish that no other mom will bear the excruciating pain of a child deployed there. Being realistic, I know these wishes are not to be granted anytime soon. Yet, if my son should be called to make the ultimate sacrifice, is it really
patriotism that would ask other parents to continue to suffer the same fate, the loss of their beloved child? Or does it mean that I have failed to grasp the inherent nobility of my son's service to our country? No validation is required: my son is, and always will be, a hero. His character and
integrity, as well as that of all who serve today, speaks most eloquently to that.

Where is our sense of brotherhood? The attitude of, "if you do not share my views, you are a pariah" is deplorable. We have no intercourse. When I attempt to frame my views through quotes from a renowned military commander, I am met with vehement spews of "Liberal!" hurled at me as an epithet:

"When people speak to you about a preventive war, you tell them to go and fight it. After my experience, I have come to hate war."

"Together we must learn how to compose differences, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose"

"If you want total security, go to prison. There you're fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only thing lacking... is freedom."

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without."

These words were spoken by President and General Dwight D. Eisenhower. If Ike now sounds "liberal" is it any wonder we find ourselves, our country, and our "family" so far adrift?

We are all in this together, paying with our blood. To impugne my Patriotism, or the service of my son fighting alongside yours, because of political differences does more harm to the fabric of this country than any terrorist could; destroying ourselves from within though jingoism. My kind
of Patriotism, predicated upon the example of those who serve, has no place for that.

Also posted at <a href="http://bsf4o.com/forums/index.php">Blue Star Families for Obama Blog</a>

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (2) | Report Objectionable Content

McCain Misstates Record on Veterans Issues

By Heidi & Blue Star Families, Blue Star Voices - Sep 29th, 2008 at 10:27 am EDT

Also listed in: 6 groups

st1:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }

McCain Misstates Record on Veterans Issues

Friday night, John McCain said “I know the veterans, I know them well, and I know that they know that I'll take care of them, and I have been proud of their support and their recognition of my service to the veterans, and I love them, and I'll take care of them, and they know that I'll take care of them.”

However, McCain’s record in the Senate contradicts this statement. And America’s veterans know this – which is why groups like the Disabled American Veterans and Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America have given McCain failing grades for his voting record on issues facing veterans and military families.

· McCain Opposes the 21st Century GI Bill Because It Is Too Generous. McCain did not vote on the GI Bill that will provide better educational opportunities to veterans of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, paying full tuition at in-state schools and living expenses for those who have served at least three years since the 9/11 attacks. McCain said he opposes the bill because he thinks the generous benefits would “encourage more people to leave the military.” (S.Amdt. 4803 to H.R. 2642, Vote 137, 5/22/08; Chattanooga Times Free Press, 6/2/08; Boston Globe, 5/23/08; ABCNews.com, 5/26/08)

· McCain Voted Against Increased Funding for Veterans’ Health Care. Although McCain told voters at a campaign rally that improving veterans’ health care was his top domestic priority, he voted against increasing funding for veterans’ health care in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007. (Greenville News, 12/12/2007; S.Amdt. 2745 to S.C.R. 95, Vote 40, 3/10/04; Senate S.C.R. 18, Vote 55, 3/16/05; S.Amdt. 3007 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 41, 3/14/06; H.R. 1591, Vote 126, 3/29/07)

· Opposed an Assured Funding Stream for Veterans’ Health Care. McCain opposed providing an assured funding stream for veterans’ health care, taking into account annual changes in veterans’ population and inflation. (S.Amdt. 3141 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 63, 3/16/06)

· McCain Voted Against Adding More Than $400 Million for Veterans’ Care. McCain was one of 13 Republicans to vote against providing an additional $430 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs for outpatient care and treatment for veterans. (S.Amdt. 3642 to H.R. 4939, Vote 98, 4/26/06)

· Voted Against Establishing a $1 Billion Trust Fund for Military Health Facilities. McCain voted against establishing a $1 billion trust fund to improve military health facilities by refusing to repeal tax cuts for those making more than $1 million a year. (S.Amdt. 2735 to S.Amdt. 2707 to H.R. 4297, Vote 7, 2/2/06)

· McCain Opposed $500 Million for Counseling Services for Veterans with Mental Disorders. McCain voted against an amendment to appropriate $500 million annually from 2006-2010 for counseling, mental health and rehabilitation services for veterans diagnosed with mental illness, posttraumatic stress disorder or substance abuse. (S. 2020, S.Amdt. 2634, Vote 343, 11/17/05)

· McCain Voted Against Providing Automatic Cost-of-Living Adjustments to Veterans. McCain voted against providing automatic annual cost-ofliving adjustments for certain veterans’ benefits. (S. 869, Vote 259, 11/20/91)

· McCain Opposed Increasing Spending on TRICARE and Giving Greater Access to National Guard and Reservists. Although his campaign website devotes a large section to veterans issues, including expanding benefits for reservists and members of the National Guard, McCain voted against increasing spending on the TRICARE program by $20.3 billion over 10 years to give members of the National Guard and Reserves and their families greater access to the health care program. The increase would be offset by a reduction in tax cuts for the wealthy. (www.johnmccain.com/Informing/ Issues/9cb5d2aa-f237-464e-9cdf-a5ad32771b9f.htm; S.Amdt. 324 to S.C.R. 23, Vote 81, 3/25/03)

· McCain Supported Outsourcing VA Jobs. McCain opposed an amendment that would have prevented the Department of Veterans Affairs from outsourcing jobs, many held by blue-collar veterans, without first giving the workers a chance to compete. (S.Amdt. 2673 to H.R. 2642, Vote 315, 9/6/07)

· McCain Also Supported Outsourcing at Walter Reed. McCain opposed an amendment to prevent the outsourcing of 350 federal employee jobs at Walter Reed Army Medical Center—outsourcing that contributed to the scandalous treatment of veterans at Walter Reed that McCain called a “disgrace.” (S.Amdt. 4895 to H.R. 5631, Vote 234, 9/6/06; Speech to VFW in Kansas City, Mo., 4/4/08)

· McCain Voted Against $122.7 Billion for Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain voted against an appropriations bill that included $122.7 billion in fiscal 2004 for the Department of Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development and other related agencies. (H.R. 2861, Vote 449, 11/12/03)

· McCain Voted Against $51 Billion in Veterans Funding. McCain was one of five senators to vote against the bill and seven to vote against the conference report that provided $51.1 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, as well as funding for the federal housing, environmental and emergency management agencies and NASA. (H.R. 2620, Vote 334, 11/8/01; Vote 269, 8/2/01)

· McCain Voted Against $47 Billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain was one of eight senators to vote against a bill that provided $47 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs. (H.R. 4635, Vote 272, 10/12/00)

· McCain Voted Against $44.3 Billion for Veterans Programs. McCain was one of five senators to vote against a bill providing $44.3 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, plus funding for other federal agencies. (H.R. 2684, Vote 328, 10/15/99)

· McCain Voted Against a $13 Billion Increase in Funding for Veterans Programs. McCain voted against an amendment to increase spending on veterans programs by $13 billion. (S.C.R. 57, Vote 115, 5/16/96)

· McCain Voted to Underfund Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain voted for an appropriations bill that underfunded the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development by $8.9 billion. (H.R. 2099, Vote 470, 9/27/95)