Monday, November 28, 2005
Why We Fight
Given the recent cut-and-run debate over our presence in Iraq, the worst attack of the weekend makes it plain why we have to be there. Here is Bill Roggio and here is Major K on the attack. From Roggio
I am not sure people understand how utterly dishonorable and horrific such an attack is. People that die in combat die as people, they die fighting for something they believe in and support. While ending their life, their life is affirmed in their death. But this, this is utterly dehumanizing. This kind of attack reduces the dead, in this case those totally incapabale of defending themselves, to nothing more than political statements. They are stripped of their life not for what they wish to affirm, but purely for the political agenda of those that have taken it.
I can think of no better way to affirm those lost lives and give them back their meaning than to fight for them. In another post, Major K replicated a cartoon that says it all
On a related note, the cut-and-run talk by the Dems is beginning to look more and more like pure political posturing, as the White House is now saying it is looking at plans for significant draw downs in the next year. My guess - and it is purely a guess at this point - is that the White House plans leaked and the Dems hopped on it in an effort to appear to be the ones that motivated withdrawal. In other words, as they have been all along, they were trying to recover initiative where they had none. Maybe, just maybe, they would be better served by getting with the program than by trying to steal the limelight. Do you think?
The Thanksgiving Day car bombing in the town of Mahmudiyah encapsulates the nature of terror attacks directed at the Iraq people. Thursday?s attack killed thirty and wounded forty. The location was a hospital, and the target was American troops handing out toys and food to children.Major K is quick to point out that it was a civlian hospital. Our withdrawal, prior to the time when the Iraqi forces are capable of dealing with such heinous threats, would only increase the boldness of the enemy with more such attacks resulting.
I am not sure people understand how utterly dishonorable and horrific such an attack is. People that die in combat die as people, they die fighting for something they believe in and support. While ending their life, their life is affirmed in their death. But this, this is utterly dehumanizing. This kind of attack reduces the dead, in this case those totally incapabale of defending themselves, to nothing more than political statements. They are stripped of their life not for what they wish to affirm, but purely for the political agenda of those that have taken it.
I can think of no better way to affirm those lost lives and give them back their meaning than to fight for them. In another post, Major K replicated a cartoon that says it all
On a related note, the cut-and-run talk by the Dems is beginning to look more and more like pure political posturing, as the White House is now saying it is looking at plans for significant draw downs in the next year. My guess - and it is purely a guess at this point - is that the White House plans leaked and the Dems hopped on it in an effort to appear to be the ones that motivated withdrawal. In other words, as they have been all along, they were trying to recover initiative where they had none. Maybe, just maybe, they would be better served by getting with the program than by trying to steal the limelight. Do you think?
