The Red and Black

The U.S. military derives its value from its capacity to protect our lives and ensure our security.

This capacity is the basis of the respect and appreciation we have for our armed forces and the soldiers that comprise it. When the military is participating in an instance of this capacity, then this activity is a legitimate use of the military and is respectable.

However, the activity of our military in the war in Iraq is something very different from the instance of this capacity. Saddam Hussein was not an "imminent threat" to our security. It did not take a genius to figure that out then, and it certainly doesn't take one to figure that out now. To be an imminent threat requires much more than simply the possession of WMDs and ill will - it requires a plan to harm and an intention to act upon that plan.

For this no evidence was ever given. Instead, it was only speculated that Saddam could possibly sneak his WMDs to al Qaeda for use. Unfortunately, this was mere speculation. In the same vein, Saddam could have jumped into his sailboat and sailed a nuclear weapon into the port of New York.

The focus and aim of the current phase of the War is to establish basic security in Iraq. Three years later, we still are trying to establish basic security. That spells incompetence with a capital "I". Only through a long string of hypothetical statements could we conclude the current activities in Iraq protect us and ensure our security.

It seems that both the initial and current phases of the War have contributed almost nothing to our protection and security. If anything, it could reasonably be argued the War, with its unpopularity and costs, has resulted in the opposite.

So, what does this entail for the actions of our troops and the sacrifices they have made?

Well, when evaluating their actions we must take into account the cause for which their sacrifices were made. For instance, we do not value and respect the actions and sacrifices of the Allied troops and the Nazi troops in World War II like they are legends. We see them differently because of the difference in the ends for their causes.

And so, we must take into account this same aspect of wartime actions with regard to the War in Iraq.

As noted above, if the basis of respect and appreciation for the activities of our military is whether they contribute to the protection of our lives and our security, and if the War is an activity that does neither, then it hardly can be demanded that we give great respect and appreciation for the actions of our soldiers.

That is not to say their actions cannot be valued and thought heroic for other reasons - it simply means they should not be valued like those that contributed to some great end or cause. They should not be placed in the same class as or valued like the sacrifices made by the veterans of many of our past wars. Does all of this devalue the lives lost and the sacrifices made in the War? Of course it does.

For many, this will be a hard pill to swallow, especially those who have been personally involved in the War. Everyone reading this should be angry. But, you should not blindly direct your anger at those who bring this fact to light. Instead, you should direct it at those who are responsible for causing this mess.

Direct your anger at the Bush administration and its supporters for wasting over half a trillion dollars (most of which has been borrowed from future taxpayers - namely us and our children) and the lives of thousands of American citizens.

- Chris Breault is a senior from Columbus majoring in philosophy.

Article Tools