|
WASHINGTON, March 22, 2005 -- As we reflect on the second anniversary of the war in Iraq, I am struck most by the fact that so few people have focused on the 1,500 young Americans killed and more than 11,000 maimed. The 20,000 GI's wounded in non-combat incidents--most of them seriously--are not even counted in public casualty reports. The tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis who have lost their lives are barely mentioned as anything more than collateral damage.
Truth is the war in Iraq is a reality only to the families of those victims and the relatives of the nearly 1 million Americans who have seen action in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is a war of a kind never before seen in our country--where the returning casualties are deposited at Dover Air Force Base in the dead of night, barred from the view of the press; where the President never speaks of our dead; and the biggest sacrifice for those who care at all is the time it takes to purchase a "Support Our Troops" sticker for their SUV's. In the consciousness of most Americans, there is no war.
The public and even the churches are silent while the ultimate sacrifice is required of our best and bravest young people. During the presidential campaign religious leaders were more interested in arguments over gay marriage than with the morality of an unjustified war.
There were no nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction. There was no imminent threat. Saddam Hussein had no responsibility for the terrorist attack on Nine-Eleven. The guilty leaders of the plot against the U.S. were in Afghanistan, where they are still at large. And the perpetrators were from Saudi Arabia, where President Bush's relationship with the royal family should have made him aware of what was coming.
Now, with all the earlier rationales for the invasion proven baseless, the President tells us that bringing American-style democracy to Iraq and the region was the real motive. Whatever the reason, the President clearly wanted to conduct what the neoconservatives considered a preemptive strike against Iraq. That country was viewed as the first test in a campaign of regime changes around the region. Iran and Syria are also on the list in a neoconservative scheme called the Project for the New American Century, which views military action as an appropriate option for projecting American preeminence around the world.
The President confirmed the policy in his most recent State of the Union Address. I would ask him: what is our mandate to use war to bring democracy to the world, even to people who may not want it? What right has any president to forcefully superimpose an alien form of government on a foreign population at the cost of young Americans being placed in harm's way? Where is the morality in decision-makers who send other people's children to their death in order to implement their aggressive ideologies while their own children and families stay behind to enjoy the fruits of massive tax cuts?
I am no expert on foreign policy, but I know something about war. It is our patriotic duty to defend the country in times of danger. But even then, there must be shared sacrifice. Protection of the homeland should not be the exclusive responsibility of those whose choice of military service is based on economics--on risking one's life in the hope of building a better future for their families.
It is not fair that most of the soldiers fighting, and dying, in Iraq are from the lower economic strata, sons and daughters of those rural and urban communities abandoned by industry where unemployment is high and prospects for the future are bleak. The financial incentives for most of them are irresistible--up to $80,000 in combined enlistment bonuses and education benefits. This so-called "economic draft" is no temptation for young people who can afford college, or for those whose economic prospects are secure without the benefit of a boost from Uncle Sam.
Even so, as the body count rises in Iraq military recruiters are having increasing difficulty filling the ranks of exhausted units. Recruiters are falling short of their quotas even as the generals talk more about the strain on the National Guard and Reserves. Something has got to give.
You can't be for the war and not support reinstatement of the draft--whether for moral or practical reasons. If the country continues to ignore the cost in lives being paid in Iraq and is willing to allow the President to pursue his foreign policy agenda, more troops will be needed, and the burden must be shared.
The silence, the lack of outrage that accompanies this war and occupation of Iraq is the worst moral failure of all. It will only end when all Americans are forced to share the burden of war and not leave it up to those who lack the political and financial will to resist.
### |
