On Saint Crispin's day, we remember that 2,000 of our country's best and brightest have died liberating Iraq
This is a few days late (sorry, we had a bit of weather down here!), but according to the Main Stream Media, it seems that on October 25th we reached some sort of artificial milestone: 2,000 of our country's best and brightest have died liberating Iraq. As is the case with most things done by the MSM, this "milestone" is only recognized for it's negatives, with no mention of anything positive that the sacrifice of those brave 2,000 men and women has attained, nor any mention of the fact that the reality of Iraq is so much better than what most had expected. Senator Patrick Leahy (Democrat-Vermont) even used the occasion to suggest we cut and run from Iraq the way we cut and run from Vietnam. All I can say is if we do what Senator Leahy (Democrat-Vermont) suggests then we will guarantee that those 2,000 soldiers did indeed die for nothing, and sign the death sentences of hundreds of thousands, perhaps even millions of Iraqi citizens. You know the ones, those with the purple fingers.
I was an officer in the Army Reserve, so I understand better than most exactly what is asked of these young men and women, and the general attitude they have about their jobs and duties. Nearly all of them understand that being in the military means that they could be put in harms way at some point, and that they are expected to do their jobs and duties no matter the circumstances. Their eyes are open and alert to this fact... they know what is going on, and they know what is expected of them. Not all perform as they should (Lynndie England, et al), or have what it takes mentally to face the risks inherent to the job (Jeremy Hinzman, et al), but for the 99.9% who do, they want nothing more than to know that their family and their country support what they are doing. And while I cannot speak for any of those 2,000 who have made the ultimate sacrifice, I do know that if I were one of them, I would not want some politician in Washington DC - like Senator Patrick Leahy (Democrat-Vermont) - being influenced by some spineless anti-war socialists into giving up that which I had paid for with my life.
But just for the sake of argument, lets assume that those spineless anti-war socialists are right and that 2,000 lives is too great a price to pay for what we are getting in Iraq. If that kind of thinking is something we should pay attention to, here are some other circumstances where the United States should have "pulled out" of a conflict or war... or perhaps not even gone into one in the first place, and the possible results:
- 2,403 American and 68 civilians men and women were killed at Pearl Harbor marking the start of our involvement in WWII... 293,000 American lives could have been saved had we stayed out. Of course the Nazis would have remained in control of Europe, developed the nuclear bomb instead of us, and there would probably have been 10-20+ million dead in the concentration camps instead of just 6 million but hey, 293,000 is a lot of American that could have been spared!
- American citizen die in the sinking of the British liner Falaba, two Americans die in sinking of the ship Arabic, and 1,195 (not all Americans) drowned in the sinking of the luxury liner Lusitania, which helped to bring the US into WWI. That war led to 58,480 dead and three times that many wounded Americans. Not quite the 2,000 threshold, and not all Americans, but again, think of the lives that could have been saved.
- The first battle of Bull Run (or first Manassas) - The Federals lost about 3,000 casualties (killed, wounded, and captured or missing), and the Confederates suffered about 2,000. Imagine if both sides had "pulled out" right then and there how many lives could have been saved! At least 618,000 Americans died in the Civil War, and some experts say the toll reached 700,000. Of course had that actually happened there would now be two separate, and much weaker countries (assuming either one would have survived being invaded by England, France, Spain, or any of the other world "superpowers" at that time), and one of them would have continued to embrace slavery.
What politicians such as Senator Patrick Leahy (Democrat-Vermont) and the anti-war liberals (Cindy Sheehan, Move-on.org, etc.) that support them fail to understand is that there are things in this world worth dying for... and it's not only or always directly about us or our interests. In a particularly chilling segment of the universally acclaimed HBO series "Band of Brothers" the soldiers of Easy Company finally enter Germany, only to discover an abandoned Nazi concentration camp, still filled with emaciated prisoners. All throughout the series up to that point, the soldiers are often seen grousing about why they have to be there fighting and dying (as soldiers throughout history have always done). When the soldiers see the unspeakable horrors of that camp, and then hear through the grapevine that several other similar camps have been discovered with even more horrible evidence of the Nazi inhumanity, they all realize exactly why they are there fighting and dying - it's not about them as Americans - it's about us, as humans. The name of that segment of the series is entitled "Why We Fight." October 25th was Saint Crispin's day. The significance of that may not resonate with everyone (even I missed it at first!), but I'm sure it does with those liberal elite in academia and it has a direct relationship to Easy Company's "Band of Brothers" as well as our current Band of Brothers & Sisters in the field today:
This day is called the feast of Crispian: He that outlives this day, and comes safe home, Will stand a tip-toe when the day is named, And rouse him at the name of Crispian. He that shall live this day, and see old age, Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours, And say 'To-morrow is Saint Crispian:' Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars. And say 'These wounds I had on Crispin's day.' Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot, But he'll remember with advantages What feats he did that day: then shall our names. Familiar in his mouth as household words Harry the king, Bedford and Exeter, Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester, Be in their flowing cups freshly remember'd. This story shall the good man teach his son; And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by, From this day to the ending of the world, But we in it shall be remember'd; We few, we happy few, we band of brothers; For he to-day that sheds his blood with me Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile, This day shall gentle his condition: And gentlemen in England now a-bed Shall think themselves accursed they were not here, And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.
Senators like Senator Patrick Leahy (Democrat-Vermont) and his ilk should not only "hold their manhoods cheap" but hold their humanity cheap as well because, should they care to look, this, this, and this is why those few - those happy few - our brave sons and daughters, are over in Iraq right now, fighting and dying. They understand why we fight, Senator Leahy (Democrat-Vermont). They understand that there is something greater than self. Do you?
Update: It seems that we actually have the thoughts and words (via Michelle Malkin) of one of those 2,000: Cpl. Jeffrey B. Starr. It seems, however, that the NYTimes is only interested in the words of Cpl. Starr that support their adgenda. Typical. So much for honoring the dead.
