Columnist Jules Witcover devoted a Memorial Day piece to describing his visits to the various war memorials in Washington and his chats with veterans there: Remembering the fallen, from the past and present Baltimore Sun 06/01/05. He writes:
I couldn't help but wonder whether there will someday be an Iraq war memorial - perhaps to honor the combatants in the 1991 Persian Gulf war, the invasion of Afghanistan after 9/11 and the invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003 and beyond.
No less than the Americans who fought and died in those earlier conflicts memorialized in stone on or near the Mall, those who fell toppling Saddam Hussein and picking up the pieces afterward deserve the respect and tribute of their fellow Americans.
Such an honor, however, would in honesty require a clear differentiation between those who died in Iraq and those who obliged them to fight in an unpremeditated and unnecessary war that has seriously undermined the good reputation of this country worldwide.
And he quotes a veteran making a similar comment:
Robert Pierce, a Marine Corps Vietnam veteran and minister from Jacksonville, N.C., made a distinction between the war and those who fight it. "I think the American public needs to be kept aware of the sacrifice men and women in uniform are making for their freedom and for others around the world," he said. "The U.S. troops in Iraq were doing what the country asked them to do - nothing more, nothing less."
It's still amazing that some people think this notion, that normal adults can make a distinction between soldiers doing their duty and the particulars of the war policy in a given situation, is something strange and bewildering.
No comments:
Post a Comment