Months ago I read with dismay about this Administration's decision to immortalize its hubris on
fallen soldiers' tombstones. Traditionally, only name, rank, military branch, date of death and, if applicable, the war and foreign country in which the hero served were inscribed. I was particularly struck by a spokesman's explanation that engraving slogans on:
"[t]he headstone is not a PR purpose. It is to let the country know and the people that visit the cemetery know who served this country and made the country free for us," VA official Steve Muro said.
And that made me wonder just who and what do these guys think "make this country free for us?" (I'm pretty sure it's not slogans!)
More...
I served over 20 years in the Army and the Army Reserves and I honor our veterans and the work they do for us all. But we - as Americans - are drifting further and further away from really understanding our country's unique history and I think no group knows this better (or experiences it more viscerally) than our soldiers and our veterans.
Granted - freedom isn't free but who and/or what really made/keeps this country free for us?
When most Americans hear the phrase "freedom isn't free," the phrase conjures the sacrifices our nation's soldiers have made throughout our history. This association is encouraged by popular poems like these: http://www.usmemorialday.org/...
http://www.ozarksfamilyfarm.com/...)
It's also prevalent in many recent melodramatic films about the wrong-headed ferocity of "warriors" like Jack Nicholson's COL Jessup in "A Few Good Men." When confronted on the witness stand with probing questions into a young marine's death at the hands of other marines under the colonel's command, COL Jessup angrily lashes out out a system he longer respects:
Jessep: You want answers?
Kaffee (Tom Cruise): I think I'm entitled to them.
Jessep: You want answers?
Kaffee: I want the truth!
Jessep: You can't handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has walls. And those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives...You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!
Kaffee: Did you order the code red?
Jessep: (quietly) I did the job you sent me to do.
Kaffee: Did you order the code red?
Jessep: You're goddamn right I did!!
http://www.whysanity.net/...
In this exchange the "warrior" for freedom admits that he ordered his young marines to attack and kill another marine. The navy lawyer, Kaffee only manages to uphold the vague abstraction called "the rule of law," in the face of the cold-blooded warrior's scornful cover-up because of the warrior's arrogance and swagger. As required by law, COL Jessup is read his rights and arrested.
The trial concludes and after the two charged marines are convicted and sentenced, one of them tells his accomplice he just doesn't understand what they did wrong. Poignantly, his accomplice sadly explains that they didn't live up to the marine creed; that they had failed to protect the weak.
Some (many?) take away from this movie (and lesser ones like it) a sense that COL Jessup and the two naive but loyal marines are the tragic hero-victims of a weakened, hypertechnical system that won't face the dangers lurking just over Jessup's "wall." In this view, America's many freedoms are almost causally linked to the brute force of arms.
But as I understand America that is the wrong lesson to take from these movies or from our history. If our "freedom" is causally related to having a strong military alone then why have there not been other nations with freedoms like ours?
Other nations - Peoples Republic of China, the Soviet Union, etc. have had (and have) vast and powerful armies and navies guarding them. Most of these nations' citizens have not thereby enjoyed the "freedoms" we increasingly take for granted.
Most American military men and women would not attribute the absence of freedom in those well-armed nations to the ex-Soviet or Chinese soldiers being unwilling to fight fiercely and to die for their countries. Just the opposite is true. Our soldiers constantly prepare for the enemies' tenacity in battle. So why do so many, especially among our civilian population wrongly attribute our blessings of freedom to the strength of arms?
Put another way, what's the difference between America (pre-BushCo) and other militarily strong regimes? IMO the difference that both our heritage and "A Few Good Men" point to is embodied in that too abstract phrase, "the rule of law."
Men who, like COL Jessup, become so warped by their self-important perceptions of `dangers' that they would order murder within their own ranks to "strengthen" or harden their forces are dangerous un-American criminals because they do not recognize any law as a limitation on their fight.
Contrary to the currently prevalent denigration of law, lawyers, and the rule of law as corrupting and weakening social forces, our unique freedoms (to the extent they survive today) emanate from the law that all of our soldiers took an oath to protect and defend, namely, the Constitution of the United States of America.
Our freedoms do not emanate from the barrel of a gun. As BushCo is learning per force, the most important components of our national power,namely, our "soft powers " seems to be shrinking as we wield our vast military power unilaterally. This is likely because that "soft" power has come from a history of working to live up to a noble creed (the rule of law) that not only inspires our young people to sacrifice themselves in service to this great nation but that also lends hope to downtrodden peoples around the globe that government by and for the people does exist somewhere on this earth.
What happened in Haditha, especially the disgraceful cover-up by the chain of command, motivated me to finally post this. In my view, only the equal protection of the laws and a constant vigil in defense of our Constitution can keep us free.