Ever since I was very young, I have been fascinated by politics. My favorite show for years was Family Ties, and Michael J. Fox was my hero. I am and have always been a Republican; a very conservative Republican. I would like to say I will always be a Republican, but lately I am not sure.
Every day I wake up over here I thank God I am in Afghanistan and not Iraq. I don’t do that because it is safer, because it is not. Statistically I am as likely to die here as I would be in Iraq; although I am safer in the winter, and more at risk in the spring and summer than I would be in Iraq. I am thankful because I don’t have to question the politics of why I am here. I can watch the videos from 9/11 or look at the many posters of the planes crashing into the World Trade Center and be assured that I believe in my mission.
As I watch the debate in Washington over Iraq, I am amazed and confused. The House recently voted on a non-binding resolution that did what the American people did in November, tell the administration they don’t like what is going on in Iraq and they don’t want to continue. So let me get this straight, after being elected to do something they do something saying they are doing nothing but should do something?
The debate is something that leaves me confused, but does not affect my morale or the morale of most Soldiers I know. I think most of us are smart enough to understand that you can disagree with a politician and simultaneously support the military. All of us in the military disagree with one politician or another, and we all have our private opinions about Iraq. The public debate just makes each of us think about it more.
The debate also causes some very odd behavior. This past election thousands of Republicans in Missouri voted in a democratic Senator, Claire McCaskill. They voted her in knowing that they would disagree with every vote she made except for one. That one vote was so critical that they went against their values and being so that Claire could cast that vote on Iraq.
Then there are the ones in the debate that will never be affected by the war; they will never go to Iraq and never know anyone that will. They will never suffer through rationing, have a desire to buy war bonds, or work overtime in a factory manufacturing war goods; however, they will loudly and proudly repeat the Republican talking points, you know “Mission Accomplished,” “Stay the course,” or “A new way ahead.” No cognitive thought involved, no real solution, just an undying support of a party affiliation.
Then you have the profiteers. Whether it is a member of the administration who’s companies are recipients of large no bid contracts, or the congressman sneaking in earmarked funds for some pork back home on a defense authorization that would be political suicide not to pass; it is all the same. The profiteering is more of a side show; it really has nothing to do with the debate on Iraq, it just shows the corrupt nature of those making decisions on Iraq. They didn’t go to war in Iraq so they could profit; however, they took full advantage of the situation to benefit themselves (both parties).
I find myself in a very unique situation; I don’t know what I think. I don’t know what the answer is. I love intellectual debate and I usually love engaging in these debates, but the more I think about it and the more I talk about it, the more confused I get. I guess I am left only to reminisce about Colin Powell; remember overwhelming force and an exit strategy. Quite a concept.