We don't measure time by the dead. We can't.
This week past was a somber reminder of the cost of freedom, as the number of American deaths in Iraq has topped 2,000.
(Of that total, a little over 400 are non-combat related deaths. Also, something that isn't talked about nearly enough, over 15,000 have been wounded in Iraq, over 7,000 were wounded and did not return to duty within 72 hours.)
As this article points out, though, it is an artifical milestone, one easy for those not paying attention to remember, since they can evenly count it out on their fingers and toes.
And, as Michelle Malkin pointed out in a column, each one of these is one too many. Each one is too much to give to the murderers who seek only to sow destruction in Iraq.
I should say here, however, I've never been comfortable with the phrase "he gave his life in the service of his country". These soldiers didn't give their lives, they weren't suicidal, their lives were ripped from them.
There are accounts of Germans in Stalingrad, at the end of their strength in those terrible conditions, opting to take an easier way out, where they would crawl out and stand on top of a trench or something, and let a Russian sniper end their life. But this is not what is happening in Iraq.
No, these Americans who have lost their lives in Iraq did not willingly give them up. What they did was willingly put themselves in a position where they could lose their lives, and that willingness is what we honor.
It is a cruel irony that the number of dead so closely approximates now the number by which we measure our years. Of course, 2005 is the Year of Our Lord, not the year we lost the 2,005th soldier in Iraq.
But to the far Left, it could just as well be the basis for our calendar, so eager are they to pin this number on anything they can find in hopes of promoting an agenda, as Lt. Col. Boylan said.
Zombietime has photos of an event in San Francisco on October 26, "commemorating" the 2,000 death. If you can stand to look through them all, ask yourself, why are they all so smiley? What is there to be cheerful about at that kind of event? If these Lefties were truly there to honor those who have fallen, wouldn't be there some solemnity in evidence? Zombietime links to this Houston event, and it's much the same thing.
Michelle Malkin has the story of something just as galling.
The New York Times had a 4,625 word story on the 2,000th death, and in it they profiled a Marine who was killed April 30. The NYTimes published part of a letter the Marine, Cpl. Jeffrey Starr, had left behind. The NYTimes article said:
From that context, you'd think a reluctant Cpl. Starr was against the war in Iraq, that he was angry at a lying President Bush who had fibbed so he could put men like Starr in harm's way just to steal Iraq's oil.
Malkin as more on the letter, but here is the paragraph from which the NYTimes took their excerpt.
For the "newspaper of record" to so egregiously twist the meaning of the words written by a Marine as he contemplated the sacrifice he might make is beyond belief. The anti-war Left is so far gone they don't hesitate to use the deaths of American soldiers as cynical means to serve an end.
The end they seek is an end to the war in Iraq, but it is wrong to count the remaining days of the war by the number of the dead, as painful as each casualty is. We all desire peace in Iraq, we all want our troops to return home to their families, but the job they are doing there is necessary. Evil does keep score by the number of dead, that is why we must fight it in Iraq.
This is the year 2005. Last night we turned back our clocks. Across this country there are about 2,005 families who are grieving, families who wish they could turn back the clock and once again hug beloved fathers, sons, daughters, loved ones.
There have been at least nine American fatalities in Iraq just since Thursday.
Let us not dishonor the fallen by counting each death as one more towards the total that will finally make us weary of Iraq and leave. Let us honor the fallen by counting each death as one that bought us another day of freedom.
(Of that total, a little over 400 are non-combat related deaths. Also, something that isn't talked about nearly enough, over 15,000 have been wounded in Iraq, over 7,000 were wounded and did not return to duty within 72 hours.)
As this article points out, though, it is an artifical milestone, one easy for those not paying attention to remember, since they can evenly count it out on their fingers and toes.
U.S. Army Lt. Col. Steve Boylan, director of the force's combined press center, wrote in an e-mail to reporters, "I ask that when you report on the events, take a moment to think about the effects on the families and those serving in Iraq. The 2,000 service members killed in Iraq supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom is not a milestone. It is an artificial mark on the wall set by individuals or groups with specific agendas and ulterior motives."
And, as Michelle Malkin pointed out in a column, each one of these is one too many. Each one is too much to give to the murderers who seek only to sow destruction in Iraq.
I should say here, however, I've never been comfortable with the phrase "he gave his life in the service of his country". These soldiers didn't give their lives, they weren't suicidal, their lives were ripped from them.
There are accounts of Germans in Stalingrad, at the end of their strength in those terrible conditions, opting to take an easier way out, where they would crawl out and stand on top of a trench or something, and let a Russian sniper end their life. But this is not what is happening in Iraq.
No, these Americans who have lost their lives in Iraq did not willingly give them up. What they did was willingly put themselves in a position where they could lose their lives, and that willingness is what we honor.
It is a cruel irony that the number of dead so closely approximates now the number by which we measure our years. Of course, 2005 is the Year of Our Lord, not the year we lost the 2,005th soldier in Iraq.
But to the far Left, it could just as well be the basis for our calendar, so eager are they to pin this number on anything they can find in hopes of promoting an agenda, as Lt. Col. Boylan said.
Zombietime has photos of an event in San Francisco on October 26, "commemorating" the 2,000 death. If you can stand to look through them all, ask yourself, why are they all so smiley? What is there to be cheerful about at that kind of event? If these Lefties were truly there to honor those who have fallen, wouldn't be there some solemnity in evidence? Zombietime links to this Houston event, and it's much the same thing.
Michelle Malkin has the story of something just as galling.
The New York Times had a 4,625 word story on the 2,000th death, and in it they profiled a Marine who was killed April 30. The NYTimes published part of a letter the Marine, Cpl. Jeffrey Starr, had left behind. The NYTimes article said:
Sifting through Corporal Starr's laptop computer after his death, his father found a letter to be delivered to the marine's girlfriend. "I kind of predicted this," Corporal Starr wrote of his own death. "A third time just seemed like I'm pushing my chances."
From that context, you'd think a reluctant Cpl. Starr was against the war in Iraq, that he was angry at a lying President Bush who had fibbed so he could put men like Starr in harm's way just to steal Iraq's oil.
Malkin as more on the letter, but here is the paragraph from which the NYTimes took their excerpt.
"Obviously if you are reading this then I have died in Iraq. I kind of predicted this, that is why I'm writing this in November. A third time just seemed like I'm pushing my chances. I don't regret going, everybody dies but few get to do it for something as important as freedom. It may seem confusing why we are in Iraq, it's not to me. I'm here helping these people, so that they can live the way we live. Not have to worry about tyrants or vicious dictators. To do what they want with their lives. To me that is why I died. Others have died for my freedom, now this is my mark."
For the "newspaper of record" to so egregiously twist the meaning of the words written by a Marine as he contemplated the sacrifice he might make is beyond belief. The anti-war Left is so far gone they don't hesitate to use the deaths of American soldiers as cynical means to serve an end.
The end they seek is an end to the war in Iraq, but it is wrong to count the remaining days of the war by the number of the dead, as painful as each casualty is. We all desire peace in Iraq, we all want our troops to return home to their families, but the job they are doing there is necessary. Evil does keep score by the number of dead, that is why we must fight it in Iraq.
This is the year 2005. Last night we turned back our clocks. Across this country there are about 2,005 families who are grieving, families who wish they could turn back the clock and once again hug beloved fathers, sons, daughters, loved ones.
There have been at least nine American fatalities in Iraq just since Thursday.
Let us not dishonor the fallen by counting each death as one more towards the total that will finally make us weary of Iraq and leave. Let us honor the fallen by counting each death as one that bought us another day of freedom.
4 Comments:
At Sun Oct 30, 09:07:00 PM, Leo Pusateri said…
Amen, friend... Amen..
Wonderful post.
Thank you!
At Sun Oct 30, 10:12:00 PM, Leo Pusateri said…
And by the way, Jeff..
A friend of mine who will be going on his third tour of duty starting this November 13th said pretty much the same things that the soldier said in his letter.
At Mon Oct 31, 11:37:00 AM, Soldier's Dad said…
The 7,000 WIA requiring evacuation is in my humble opinion, overstated.
http://www.armymedicine.army.mil/news/medevacstats/200507/oif.htm
At Mon Oct 31, 12:49:00 PM, Jeff said…
Thanks for the clarification. I've changed my wording, but I meant over 7,000 have been wounded and did not return to duty within 72 hours. See the following...
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/casualty.pdf
My apologies if I confused that for evacuations.
Post a Comment
<< Home