Wednesday, December 27, 2006

The Deafening Silence of Grief

In the last 24 hours -

  • I've lost a family member

Which of these was preventable?

We're almost up to 3,000 American deaths in Iraq.

How many more must die before we stop sending our brave men and women to the slaughter?

10 comments:

Mike said...

I am sorry to hear about your loss.

Cathleen said...

Me too JL. Drop me a line if you wanna chat.

LiberalLucy said...

And this is why I love my blogging community.

Thanks guys, you're the bestest!

Anonymous said...

You are commiting a great disservice to our service people by devaluing what they VOLUNTEER to do because THEY DO BELIEVE IN THE CAUSE. How dare you equate their beliefs and patriotism to animalistic rituals.

While each of the 3000 casualties of this almost-four year war are tragic, our wonderfully trained military and advanced technology has a LOT to be proud of in their accomplishments on the ground and in their training. (We lost over 50,000 Americans IN ONE DAY at the Battle of Gettysburg, and a half-million in WWII during our involvement of less than 4 years).

You don't have to agree with the decisions that are made at a level higher than you, but geez... stop demoralizing the troops with the liberally-twisted media rhetoric.

My friends and relatives over there certainly aren't benefiting from it, neither are my parents as they are watching their son get ready to head over next month, and if you are truly interested in helping our "poor troops", knock it off.

LiberalLucy said...

Thanks Anon. for ringing and running.

I'm sorry if you didn't quite get my post. It is because I have so much respect and admiration for what our troops do that I get so angered and frustrated by the way. The choice to serve is one that no one should take lightly. Those men and women if nothing else deserve their own special place in heaven for the risks and sacrifices they make each day.

Being the daughter of a Vietnam Veteran, I have seen what serving his country for a war that had nothing to do with our country did to my father and all of those who served with him. I don't believe that these men and women who risk it all deserve to be put in harms way for oil and private interests.

Because they are such an incredible and dedicated group of citizens, our troops deserve us working harder to keep them safe.

We don't need a high casualty rate to be proud of our troops. If anything, high casualty rates show how we fail them. If we respect and appreciate what they do for us, then we as a country and a government should have the decency to do our darnedest to keep them out of harms way - whether it's equipment, intelligence, or making sure we're only risking their lives because our country is really threatened. Is that really too much to ask?

Anonymous said...

I don't think you got MY post. As far as remaining Anonymous, I only surfed through and responded to your post. This is a public forum after all. As I don't intend to be a "regular" there is no point registering.

I, too, am the daughter of a Vietnam vet. Again, the cause aside, it was the mistreatment they recevied from the American population upon their return which contributed greatly to the stigma assigned to those who served. There were certainly no hero's welcomes, unless you consider being spit on in public a warm welcome. The disservice our fathers received was being ostracized by their own countrymen.

I am also the granddaughter of a WWII vet, and have many, many friends who are, or have spouses, who are in the Middle East right now. And as I said, my brother leaves shortly to command a team of an elite group of 16 who will be embedded in the Afghanistan army to provide them with the training to defend themselves against the Taliban, because right now they just fight like barbarics, without a care as to whether they live or die, which will eventually lead to another resurgency of the Taliban. My brother's team is currently learning the Afghan languages, and preparing to teach the Afghans to use tactics and strategy to be effective against these factions without becoming annihilated. To insinuate we are sending our soldiers off to slaughter greatly demeans the true nature of their work.

How many soldiers in the middle east do you know that you are basing your assumptions on? They are so incredibly proud of what they are accomplishing. Just as you are proud of what you are doing with your blog. Others may not agree with what you are doing, but it doesn't mean you cut and run from your computer just to appease the few. You continue doing what you feel is right.


It's not about oil or private interests. If that's why we're over there, tell that to the families of the 3000 people who died on 9/11. I'm sure you realize we are not there to fight the people of Iraq or Afghanistan, it is the groups embedded within these countries who wish to do great harm to us and others around the world. Any historical search on the internet, or in a book (gasp!), will show you they stop at nothing, as long as they are alive, to destroy those who don't share in their beliefs. How fortunate you must feel to not have to worry that you will be killed because your views aren't shared by everyone.


Just something to ponder: If it were about oil (which it isn't) can you fathom this country's dependency, YOUR dependency, on oil and where we'd be if that were cut off? Medical supplies made out of plastics, stupid little food containers, packaging used for keeping life-saving equipment sanitary... all relies on the availability of oil. And how much are you willing to pay for gas if middle east oil were removed from the equation?

I certainly respect your right to your opinions, but you should do your homework on both sides of the aisle before you try to pass off your opions, or those of others, as facts.

By definition, you are not a patriot of this country. A patriot is defined as "one who loves his or her country and supports its authority and interests" (www.m-w.com). What a shame so many people have died defending your constitutional rights, only for you to try to convince them they are some sort of victim, while attempting to glorify yourself as a caring citizen. BS.

If you're really interested in supporting our troops, visit www.anysoldier.com and do something productive. Your blogging isn't going to change a single thing. It's not going to bring anyone home any sooner, return any soldier from the grave, convince the those who practice terrorism that they need to follow another path. You only exchange rah-rahs with an isolated group who read what you write and feel they are somehow being educated by your opinions.

I am done here, much to your dismay I'm sure, but I know many others who would love to read what you have to say...

Lynn (ring, ring)

Mike said...

Cheney had "other priorities," Bush spent Vietnam drinking in New Orleans, and Rumsfeld didn't serve in Vietnam either.

But that's besides the point. We live in a democratic republic. We have the right to criticize our government--especially when they tax cut and spend us into deep debt and pursue a naive, imperialistic, and arrogant foreign policy.

I've had enough of Bush--and his keyboard warrior minions--questioning my patriotism and the patriotism of my friends. I remember 9-11, and I remember how non-partisan it was. But then Bush listened to Rove and exploited it for partisan gain.

Then Bush listened to his deluisonal friends and started a stupid war. Bush's "doctrine," and it's so flimsy that I hestiate to call it that, said that the purpose of the Iraq War was to stop the "axis of evil" from getting nuclear weapons. We found out Saddam didn't have them, and never was going to have them. Since then, North Korea has detinated one, and Iran is developing one. The war provoked rouge states into developing nuclear weapons, which they now see as an important defense against American imperialism.

So since the war started, there are more weapons of mass destruction. For geopolitical reasons that are beyond neoconservatives' collective grasp, I seriously doubt that those weapons will ever fall into terrorists hands. Still, the world--and our country--is less safe because of Bush's war.

Our troops are trying to uphold the good name of our country, and that service is admirable. But that name has been undermined by a go-it-alone foreign policy that tolerates, if not endorses, human rights violations. I'm sorry, but I will always speak up against Rumsfeld--who is hated by the military as well--and his pro-torture memos.

Mike said...

And to add one more thing, the lower (but still too high) number of American deaths is a reflection of the advancements of medicine. Something like 17,000 men and women have been seriously wounded. Many of those people would've died in earlier conflicts. Trauma medicine has come a long way.

Also, the total number of deaths caused by the Iraq War is staggering. A non-partisan Johns Hopkins study found that nearly 600,000 Iraqis have died since the start of the war.

Finally, the Civil War comparison is BS, as doctors were just beginning to understand the sterile thing then....many men who would've survived battles in the Civil War died of hospital-acquired infections then. Since then, anesthesia has been developed, surgery has been refined into a precise and sterile art, the concept of a blood transfusion has been grasped, and medical facilities have become sterile.

Anonymous said...

1. We thought we shouldn't get involved in WWII. After all, what Hitler and the German army were doing in Europe didn't directly threaten us either.

2. My postings are based upon the initial comment implying our troops were there for nothing. I really thought this was form for converstion, and people here were mature and open to possibly seeing beyond the ends of their noses.

3. I don't give a damn what Bush, Cheney, or anyone else did prior to 2000. Didn't affect me, or the entire country, or the world for that matter. Such a liberal mentality -- yes, but what were Carter and Clinton doing while IN OFFICE? Look up your facts next week when you're back in high school.

4. Gettysburg was merely an example to exemplify our progress. Medicine is not the exclusive reason for decreased mortality.

But fine, remove every casualty from the equation of those Gettysburg soldiers who died from secondary causes (illness, infection, starvation, or some venereal disease). Not everyone American solder who died in the gulf did so in battle, either. You're splitting hairs, and avoiding the original subject.

5. More Vietnamese died in the VN war than the total number of Americans who died in our top 12 wars. How's that for information irrelevant to this particular topic? 600,000 Iraqis died, and gee--just a hunch, but I'm guessing the vast majority of those were killed by other IRAQIS. And the killing in the middle east certainly didn't start when we showed up. No, Saddam became his own WMD by wiping out the estimated 2 million of his own people. So what's your point?

6. I stand by my original recommendation. If you, if anyone, is really interested in doing right by our troops, quit demoralizing them by casting statements that what they are doing is without a cause, and without success. It's simply not factual. Who in the world are you HELPING by doing so? No one. Not one soul. And becuase this causes emotional harm, and no physical good, it appears you would rather bring anyone down you can so as to assume a very warped sense of superiority.

7. So you really think our "preoccupation" with the issues in Iraq/Afghanistan are the contributors to N. Korea and Iran developing nuclear weapons??? C'mon... Do you have ANY idea how ridiculous that statement is? You think they just started all this just three years ago? "Hey, guys, those imperialistic Americans are tied up right now fighting for oil and private interests, pull out the plans and let's throw together a nuclear bomb!"

8. And as far as I'm concerned, based on our brief acquantance, I'm convinced you are a bed-wetting high school student with social anxienty issues. And why shouldn't I treat you as such? After all, if I think it is true, it is... right? I don't know you, where you live, what you do, or if you're IQ even breaks 100, but I'm sure I know what your problems are and how to fix them. I've got you pegged by nuggets of information I've obtained from your two blog postings. And now that I'm saying this in the blog world, it must be fact. Right?

But no, I'm a bit above that. In real life you're probably a bright, nice guy.

Remember that when you choose to label a person or a group you may know nothing about.

Again, I strongly recommend you visit www.anysolder.com. Read the words from our soldiers, even if you opt not to contribute to support them.

I wish my friends' husbands could come home today from Iraq. I wish the neighbor's son, a marine who died in Iraq, could bring him back from the grave. And I certainly don't want my brother going off the Afghanistan, but it's his career, it's what he's done for 20 years, and HE believes in it. I wouldn't dare call him a victim of Bush's war, or even suggest he is going off to slaughter. That would impune all he has worked for. This is personal. Your attacks are personal. He is going to train these people to defend themselves, as they obviously don't have it mastered quite as well as we do, and I'm so proud of that. And hopefully, when all is said and done, they will all come home safe, and those in the middle east can defend themselves against those terror groups and insurgencies who kill ruthlessly.

Don't you agree if Iraq and Afgh. were able to take control of their countries and become strongholds for the region, they can minimize or eliminate the violence? And to presume it's not possible isn't fair... when is the last time you heard about insurgency attacks and car bombs going off in the US, or Sweden, or New Zealand? Or nearly anywhere else? It's possible, providing the poison is removed from power.

If the blog world is nothing more than one-sided, close-minded followers, what is the point? Liberals write liberal blogs, supported by liberals. Same goes for conservatives. Neither side is 100% right, so when does everyone get together and share their thoughts and ideas for the good of everyone?

Lynn

LiberalLucy said...

Lynn -

Diversity of thought and a sharing of different opinions are important and I normally welcome it.

However, because you've resorted to mixing in juvenile barbs admist your information, I'm going to thank you for stopping by and inform you that I've decided to shut off comments for this post.

I encourage you to continue stopping by. If you have comments that are mature and informative in nature, you're more than welcome to leave them.