You Don't Support Us


#1

A Soldier in Iraq writes:

You Don’t Support Us

As a member of the U.S. Military in Iraq, let me say something very clearly to Newsweek, the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times, CBS, ABC, and any other media organization of any integrity.

You are creating greater risk for me personally. You are creating incredible hostility in Muslim countries due to incessant negative reporting out of context and ignoring orders of magnitude of good news in doing so. Yet, in your jaded imaginations, you believe every misconception you spin is ever more confirmation of what you always knew about the U.S. Military. These unrelenting Vietnam analogies are like press versions of drug addled flashbacks.

You create added danger for my soldiers. You feed into enemy (yes, enemy) propaganda efforts in yielding unlimited access to pre-staged voices with calculated intent. You are entirely ignorant of the countries you claim to cover, and you know as little about the U.S. Military, its culture, climate, training, procedures, and ways of operation. You diminish and demean our service.

You cause greater concern, fear and worry for our friends and family. You expand pinpoints of data into grossly distorted exaggerations of fact, and paint broad brush strokes of violence without any context or comparison to relative levels elsewhere. You have no sense of proportion or equivalence. You have no regard for collateral damage, and yet see imagined carnage with every surgical strike, precision bomb, or targeted raid. You can speak of cities destroyed with the destruction of a single building.

We daily see the gross distortions. We cannot recognize the caricatures you scratch out, neither in our fellow soldiers, nor in the battlespace we inhabit. Your vain and callous search for what you indignantly claim as objectivity is really nothing more than neutrality in the face of absolute evil. Even though you are neither architect nor sponsor of that evil, you are accomplice in its result. And you continue to ignore the consequence.

We are proud of our Military, our Country, and how, for over 200 years, the U.S. has tried to improve both ourselves and the world around us, usually for little thanks and much scorn and insult. We police ourselves. Every scandal you report, from My Lai to Iran Contra to Abu Ghraib, has been first reported to authorities by military personnel. And that has resulted in prosecutions and punishment. And what do you stress in your reporting? The sins, crimes, and misdemeanors and rarely if ever remark on the ability and willingness for us to identify and correct malfeasance in our ranks.

Never, never claim to support the soldiers, you don’t, you never will in any meaningful way until you can see your prejudices for what they are, work to eliminate them, and for once try to view the world with an open and not a closed mind. You need to rethink how you consider the idea of a just war after 9/11. You need to acknowledge that you don’t know the modern U.S. Military or the men and women who serve.

Only then can you hope to develop any kind of truly objective view of your world.

And if, after all that, you still think the U.S. causes more harm than good in the world, then there really is no hope for you at all. You are a citizen without a state. And that’s too bad, because there is no greater country in the world than the U.S.

Man, this isn’t what I intended to write. I got mad. See what happens?

This is what prompted my unhinged state.

read the rest:


#2

And if, after all that, you still think the U.S. causes more harm than good in the world, then there really is no hope for you at all. You are a citizen without a state.

This doesn’t make sense. What about the citizen who believes his country is doing more harm than good, but is actively working to rectify this? Should he not be equally considered a citizen of his country, or is citizenship to be equated with blind support of whatever foreign policy adventure the government comes up with?


#3

[quote=ybeayf]This doesn’t make sense. What about the citizen who believes his country is doing more harm than good, but is actively working to rectify this? Should he not be equally considered a citizen of his country, or is citizenship to be equated with blind support of whatever foreign policy adventure the government comes up with?
[/quote]

You are treading on thin ice here. There is one thing to be a loyal dissenter and another thing entirely to give aid and comfort to the enemy and undermind what our country is trying to do in Iraq right now. The soldier was pointing out that many have now crossed the line.

Simply because you disagree does not give you carte blanche to undermind what your country is trying to do in Iraq. That would be the job of the enemy. We use to call that treason. In fact, it still is in the Constitution:

**Article 3, Section. 3. **

Clause 1: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. …


#4

You are treading on thin ice here.

Then let me jump up and down a few times. I will freely admit that I am an enemy of the current administration of this country; I believe they are a corrupt gang of wannabe tyrants who if left unchecked will merrily drag us all down to hell with them. I do not, however, consider “America” as my enemy, nor the people thereof, except inasmuch as they willingly and knowingly support the destructive policies of the government. I support the troops who are fighting overseas inasmuch as I wish to recall them to this country immediately; I believe they are fighting an unjust and immoral war and those soldiers who knowingly and willingly are fighting that war (i.e. not under duress) I most emphatically do not support.

There is one thing to be a loyal dissenter and another thing entirely to give aid and comfort to the enemy and undermind what our country is trying to do in Iraq right now.

I will give aid and comfort to anybody I consider worthy of aid and comfort, even if they are enemies of the current government, and I would greatly like to undermine what our country is doing in Iraq right now, preferably by kicking Bush and company out of office and pulling back all of our overseas forces. If you think that’s treasonous, you are welcome to bite me.

George Bush is not America. The government are not America. For that matter, the constitution is not America. Governments come and go, regimes come and go, but Americans are a people, a volk, a narod, and it is that which I support, not whatever politician happens to be looting the taxpayer’s pockets this year.


#5

You can be against the current administration (or any administration) of a country and still be a loyal patriot. Many, many, many loyal Americans hated FDR (still do).

As to your consitution remark, you are going to have to decide just how much you are going to throw away and still call yourself an American. IMHO: it is kinda like throwing the Nicene Creed out and calling yourself a Catholic. … my 2-cents.


#6

You can be against the current administration (or any administration) of a country and still be a loyal patriot.

Glad to hear it.


#7

[quote=gilliam]You can be against the current administration (or any administration) of a country and still be a loyal patriot. Many, many, many loyal Americans hated FDR (still do).
[/quote]

What? Are you saying that anyone who was against the Clinton administration and actively worked against it was not a loyal patriot? Look, some of the the politically conservative folk can really get under my skin sometimes, but I would never call them non or anti-Americans. Maybe you need to rephrase/qualify/explain your statement?


#8

[quote=gilliam]You are treading on thin ice here.
[/quote]

:eek:

Sounds like some people can’t wait to get the gulags up and running in the USSA.

Land of the Free? That was then and this is…?

What makes the difference?
.


#9

[quote=gilliam] There is one thing to be a loyal dissenter and another thing entirely to give aid and comfort to the enemy and undermind what our country is trying to do in Iraq right now.
[/quote]

I agree. We can tell our government that we want our soldiers out of Iraq NOW!, and we can do all in our power to get our men home, but we don’t have a right to join Al-Qaida or the Iraqi Insurgents to bring that about.

Simply because you disagree does not give you carte blanche to undermind what your country is trying to do in Iraq. That would be the job of the enemy.

Any American seeking to join the Iraqi Insurgency would be a traitor.


#10

[quote=gilliam]You are entirely ignorant of the countries you claim to cover, and you know as little about the U.S. Military
[/quote]

This soldier is ignorant of how major news organizations operate. Their correspondents are almost always quite familiar with the particular countries they cover, and numerous correspondents are Service veterans or cover our Armed Forces sufficiently to know plenty about them.


#11

[quote=edmundkarol]This soldier is ignorant of how major news organizations operate. Their correspondents are almost always quite familiar with the particular countries they cover, and numerous correspondents are Service veterans or cover our Armed Forces sufficiently to know plenty about them.
[/quote]

That’s not accurate. Many times correspondents are sent from one country to the other simply because they are in the region. Amanpour from CNN was 1st given the foreign desk simply because she was not in Georgia. Other correspondents are known to their editors as ‘war correspondents’ because they are willing to take a risk and jump from one country to the next because of that fact. The Italian correspondent who was kidnapped was pathetically igonorant of what Iraqis were thinking.

So while you might be accurate in some cases, in many cases you are not.


#12

[quote=gilliam]So while you might be accurate in some cases, in many cases you are not.
[/quote]

Ain’t that the truth about every one of us! :slight_smile:


#13

[quote=edmundkarol]Ain’t that the truth about every one of us! :slight_smile:
[/quote]

:thumbsup:


#14

The point seems to have gotten lost in a lot of rhetoric. The fact is the mainstream media in this country is on the liberal left. They emphasize everything bad that is happening in Iraq and elsewhere we are involved because they hate the Bush administration more than they care about the consequences of what they print. They tell nearly nothing of any of the good our service men and women are doing, and there is plenty they could be writing about. That is the beef and it is a legitimate one.


#15

[quote=Della]The point seems to have gotten lost in a lot of rhetoric. The fact is the mainstream media in this country is on the liberal left. They emphasize everything bad that is happening in Iraq and elsewhere we are involved because they hate the Bush administration more than they care about the consequences of what they print. They tell nearly nothing of any of the good our service men and women are doing, and there is plenty they could be writing about. That is the beef and it is a legitimate one.
[/quote]

Most of the MSM doesn’t like the military and continues to show it. I think it is a legitimate beef as well.


#16

The fact is the mainstream media in this country is on the liberal left. They emphasize everything bad that is happening in Iraq and elsewhere we are involved because they hate the Bush administration more than they care about the consequences of what they print.

Amazing how one’s view of the media changes depending on where on the political compass one is on. I think the mainstream media in this country are unabashed lapdogs of the current administration, who blindly parrot the party line much more often than not. Don’t forget that Fox News is part of the mainstream media, too.


#17

[quote=ybeayf]Amazing how one’s view of the media changes depending on where on the political compass one is on. I think the mainstream media in this country are unabashed lapdogs of the current administration, who blindly parrot the party line much more often than not. Don’t forget that Fox News is part of the mainstream media, too.
[/quote]

The vast majority of the White House press doesn’t like the military. That is so obvious that they are even admitting it. Someone posted an article to that effect here not so long ago.

I wouldn’t pint to Fox as if it controlled the MSM. Fox is only one news source, surrounded by thousands of liberal sources and a handful of conservative ones.


#18

HH: Let me ask you something. Major K, a major in the Army who is reporting from Iraq on his blog all the time says, all this being said, it is no small wonder that a gulf has opened between journalists and the general public. I think even the most John Q. Sixpacks know when they are being fed a line of blank blank blank. My brother called me a journalist once during a conversation about this blog. I was offended. That is a general impression among the American military about the media, Terry. Where does that come from?

TM: "It comes from, I think, a huge gulf of misunderstanding, for which I lay plenty of blame on the media itself. **There is, Hugh, I agree with you, a deep anti-military bias in the media. One that begins from the premise that the military must be lying, and that American projection of power around the world must be wrong. I think that that is a hangover from Vietnam, and I think it’s very dangerous. **That’s different from the media doing it’s job of challenging the exercise of power without fear or favor."
Hugh Hewitt interview with ABC’s White House Correspondent Terry Moran


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.