But Not In Vain

[NanceGreggs]

But Not In Vain
By Nancy Greggs

As we hear the increasing numbers of troop casualties coming out of Iraq, we also hear the attendant comment more often than not: They died in vain.

I am afraid I must heartily disagree with that phrase, that attitude, that mindset that we have mistakenly allowed to become an acceptable part of our daily discourse.

There is no question that their mission was based on deceit of monumental proportions, or that they were sent into harm’s way by people whose agenda had more to do with dollars than democracy. They followed orders handed down by a Commander-in-Chief whose strategy was based on the advice of war profiteering yes-men, were led into battle by incompetent fools, were cheered on by politicians whose support was limited to bumperstickers and flag pins worn on lapels.

But regardless of the lies that brought them to where they now rest, they did not die in vain. Each death causes a ripple in the American stream of consciousness, and those individual ripples are now becoming waves too powerful to be ignored. For every casualty there is a parent, a sibling, a neighbor, a friend; someone who vows to do what is necessary to stop the carnage, someone who redoubles their efforts to end the deceit that led to the graveyard, someone who has reassessed his previous position that might-makes-right no matter the cost.

No American soldier has ever died in service to their country in vain. The effect of their sacrifice may be temporarily lost in the grief of the moment, in the tears that flow unabated as their earthly remains are lowered into the ground, all trace of their existence seemingly lost forever. But these men and women will live on in the memories of those closest to them, and in the hearts of all citizens who have now had their eyes opened to the horrors of war, especially one that is waged with an abundance of ineptitude and an obvious lack of real purpose.

These heroes and heroines are not a number, a nameless, faceless statistic on a military record somewhere. Nor is their sacrifice a comma in history, but rather a series question marks that are causing a nation to demand answers.

If their deaths give rise to voices that cry out for change, embolden actions to defeat those who sent them into harm’s way based on lies, and strengthen our resolve to destroy the enemy here at home that would use our precious human treasure as a means to gain power and wealth, their sacrifice is given meaning and purpose.

They have died in numbers too great, in circumstances too horrific, for reasons too muddled, for a goal that now seems obviously too ignoble to countenance.

But if we persevere in our efforts to ensure their deaths mark the end of this era of blood-letting for the sake of power and greed, their passing will be acknowledged and honored, mourned and regretted, remembered and, hopefully, learned from.

But not in vain.

[Monkeyman]

1. In Vain and for lies

[pooja]

2. I respectively disagree. These lives were wasted. This war was

useless. There is no reason to implement the kind of death we have spread from the bosom of America. We are the place where the ideals were something to believe in. We have been stripped from our dignity. America is officially dead. The ending came on Oct 17th. These soldiers are now fighting exclusively for George Bush. He has become the official dictator. God so help us as he rules.

[NanceGreggs]

3. And if their deaths lead to CHANGE that course ...

... are those deaths still in vain?

If you believe America is 'officially dead', may I ask why you're still bothering to post here? Do you feel an overwhelming need to educate those of us who still believe in our country -- and, more to the point, in each other -- that there is no point to our efforts?

Sorry, pooja, but if you have already buried the country, I am in a quandry as to why you insist on sticking around for the post-mortem.

[pooja]

8. Because I believe in the resurection and will fight for it until I am dead

or sitting in Gitmo myself. The deaths of innocents for a rich man's game is futile. If anyone thinks war is glamorous or proves a point, they are simply deluded. Do I think it was in an egomaniacs vanity that people have died, yes.

Some of your posts I hardily agree with. This is not one of them. I remain a peaceful person. And I maintain that all acts of violence on everyone worldwide is wrong. It is all because of someone else's vanity.

[NanceGreggs]

14. You didn't say anything about resurection in your original post.

Yes, this war is futile. Yes, it was based on lies. Yes, it was meant as part of a PNAC-BushCo agenda that has nothing to do with national security, or promoting democracy - it has EVERYTHING to do with power and money. We all know that.

My only point here is that the more US soldiers die in this fiasco, the more people turn against Bush and his party. I believe those mounting casualties are largely responsible for the support the Democrats now have. So if those deaths lead to us taking back our country from the war-mongering GOP, those deaths were not in vain. They just may have saved their fellow citizens from allowing the Bush reign of terror to continue unabated.

[LeahMira]

29. If their deaths lead to a change in course...

... then that course change is the most expensive one imaginable.

If you're just talking about ending this particular war, then all those who did not die will have reason to be grateful. But over fifty thousand died in Vietnam, and still this country didn't learn that it has no right to intervene in the business of others whose way of doing business doesn't suit ourselves.

Pooja has a point, although I can still hope and pray that all the really bad policies will be reversed eventually. Our government is so determined to "bring democracy to the world" that it is allowing itself permission to do almost unimaginable things in order to succeed. That involves justifying things that only a decade ago we would at least have publicly been shocked and indignant about. I also worry about those things we don't ever hear about.

Entirely too few people seem very concerned... just as long as we get rid of those terrorists, all's fair. I can't tell you how many times I've heard that if you're obeying the law you have nothing to worry about with wiretaps, etc. That sounds reasonable until you consider how inept this government has shown itself to be and what kinds of laws it's been passing of late.

The people may well turn against Bush. The question, as I see it, is will they turn against some of his ideas. Will they turn against the idea that the U.S. has some right, by virtue of its power, to reorder the world in its own image and likeness? I'm not optimistic about that.

[mike_c]

4. utterly in vain-- their lives were thrown away for NOTHING....

They died in service of facism and lies. They died to stoke the grandiose delusions of a corrupt cabel of PNAC politicians and their enablers. They died for network news ratings. They did not die for any good purpose whatsoever. They certainly did not die in service to America-- their "service" has helped destroy this nation's reputation and moral standing.

They died in vain.

[NanceGreggs]

6. Their service did not destroy this nation's moral standing ...

... BushCo did that, his lies did that, his supporters did that.

Our troops did no such thing.

[mike_c]

9. then what "service to America" do you think they've performed...

...in Iraq? I say they've done nothing but serve fascism.

[JeffR]

10. C'mon, fer chrissakes

That response doesn't make sense, IMHO. The OP says nothing about the invasion and occupation of Iraq being their "service to America". They enlisted in an all-volunteer army, and their Commander-in-Thief sent them on a bogus mission based on lies, period. The fault is not theirs. It should be laid at the feet of the Joint Chiefs, the Secretary of State, and the so-called President.

How does blaming the pawns in this game help in condemning the king and his bishops? It doesn't. You need to remember who's at fault here. It sure as hell ain't kids who enlisted and are doing what their "government" told them to do. They've done what they were ordered to do, as fucked up and immoral as it is.

Pick your targets better. There's plenty of them out there. Focus.

[mike_c]

11. then I'll ask you the same question-- what service to America...

...have U.S. military troops performed in Iraq? How has their deaths in Iraq not been in vain?

I'm not "blaming the pawns" for anything. I'm saying that their service in Iraq has hurt America rather than helping it, regardless of their reason for being there, and that everyone who has died in Iraq died for no good purpose. If you seriously dispute those statements then that is the beginning of an argument in favor of the war against Iraq. I'd be very interested to hear your rationale for that.

[JeffR]

13. mike, my wording wasn't clear enough

And re-reading your post, I agree you weren't blaming the pawns.

My contention is that these men and women serve the country simply by enlisting, and if the maniacs running the government send them out in a criminal enterprise, that simply makes a mockery of that service.

The invasion and occupation of Iraq are destroying that country, and could end up destroying this one. But my interpretation of the OP is that we must try to draw meaning and wisdom from these deaths, and that the changing of one mind against this horror can give one of these tragic and unnecessary deaths meaning.

Further, though way off topic from the OP, I think the bravest soldier I've heard of is Ehren Watada, who risks a heavy prison sentence for his refusal of deployment to Iraq. But I can't bring myself to condemn the thousands who have not refused to go. I blame the people who give them their marching orders.

Hope that clarifies what I was trying to say.

[NanceGreggs]

12. I didn't say they performed any service to America in Iraq.

I am talking about the fact that their deaths have turned the tide of public opinion against this war, against BushCo, against the idea that the country can be made safer through violence on others. If these mounting casualties prevent support for another war in future, then those deaths were not in vain - they served the greater purpose of opening people's eyes to the true cost of war.

If US casualties in Iraq had been few, the people who originally supported it would still be doing so. They would still be supporting Bush and his policies; they would be rushing in droves to the polls next month to re-elect Republicans.

If these deaths have caused the public to wake up to what Bush, and the PNAC agenda, is REALLY all about, then they truly did die saving their country - not from Al Qeada, or any other enemy this administration has created -- but from continuing down this path of useless violence. That is what I meant by 'not in vain'.

[mike_c]

15. then the only result of their deaths was to show how senseless...

...their deaths were-- theirs and all the folks they killed along the way, of course. I call that "in vain."

[NanceGreggs]

16. Every death in this war has been 'senseless' ...

... troops and Iraqi civilians, because it has accomplished nothing positive or productive - NOTHING.

However, if the senselessness of it all causes people to turn against pursuing this kind of action in future, THAT will prevent further deaths from happening.

We can't bring back those who have died. But we can, as a nation, adopt a very different attitude towards war, towards violence, as a DIRECT result of those deaths. And that can translate into a massive lack of support for future politicians whose agenda includes war as the answer to anything and everything.

Millions of people who were gung-ho about going into Iraq are now equally as gung-ho to get out. It was seeing those growing casualty numbers that set that mechanism of thought in place.

IMHO, these deaths have opened millions of American eyes to the senselessness of this course of action, to the fact that they have been misled by a corrupt administration, and to the fact that this should NEVER be repeated. That won't bring back those we have lost - but it could very well prevent others being lost in future.

[Imagevision]

31. Others may also ask, just what is this noble cause our men and women are dying for in Iraq?

So many felt proud and the patriotic thing to do was join up and enlist after 9-11 but to cut and run when the job was incompleted in Afganistan while Bush allowed Bin Laden's capture to be outsourced and finally a lost cause, these exceptional people fighting for the US. or because of when their own government lies to them about seeking out WMD's among other labels only to state today that it doesn't matter, Saddam was a bad guy and the world is safer now that he's gone?!

Sorry for ramblin, I couldn't have done it without hearing the sound bytes from the Bush regime

The noble cause, the wmd's was/is a lie and too many people have been slaughtered because their government lied and deceived them, deceived the world.

[Mythsaje]

5. In ancient magickal traditions

one of the greatest sources of energy to save a nation or a people is the power of self-sacrifice. Not the sacrifice of others, but that of a person who gives his or her life in order to send (or take) a message to the Gods.

It may be that these deaths might tip the balance in this country away from fascism...not by sending a message to "the Gods" but by sending a message to the American People. They're dying for US. And it may well be their deaths that give us the ability to turn the tide against those trying to drag us down to the depths of tyranny.

[NanceGreggs]

7. Thanks, Mythsaje.

I believe that to everything, there is a purpose. I will not accept that the brave young men and women who marched off to this war, and lost their lives as a result, did so without meaning or purpose.

As the casualties have mounted, the support for this war -- and those who perpetrated it -- has continually diminished. They did not die to accomplish the BushCo goals; instead, they may very well have died to save their country from ever again pursuing the self-serving aims of those who have so clearly profited financially as a result of war-by-deception.

Rest in peace, our beloved soldiers. You may have saved your nation from tyranny after all.

[VioletLake]

17. Many folks want to have their corpse and eat it too.

The dictionary defines "in vain" as: not yielding the desired outcome; to no avail; without success. Considering that the "desired outcome" in this case was an American-controlled Iraq, it does appear that they died - and are dying - in vain.

One of the reasons that their soul-dead, brain-damaged Commander-in-Chief insists on investing more lives toward the "desired outcome" is that he knows that “without success,” their deaths are in vain.

This line of reasoning is like a gambler saying, "I'm broke but it was worth it because now I know that gambling is a bad way to invest one's money." Or like a smoker saying, "This lung cancer was worth it because now I know that smoking doesn't improve the quality of one's life."

While we're busy obsessing about the deaths of 2,800 American servicemen, let's not forget the half a million Iraqis that have been killed - presumably also for the "desired outcome."

Edit to add, "one of the reasons that."

[NanceGreggs]

19. Bush's "desired outcome" will never materialize.

Nor am I talking about people dying to achieve that outcome. There is no "success' to be had here, no possible "win" - and every casualty DRIVES THAT POINT HOME to more and more Americans every day.

The "outcome" of these casualties has become exactly the OPPOSITE of what Bush et al desired. It has caused the public to turn against him, and against the party that supported this debacle in the first place.

Every time I see another soldier die, I think, "There goes another segment of the US population deciding to vote AGAINST the current office-holders who want this senseless war to continue."

THAT is what I meant by their deaths not being in vain - not because their sacrifice has furthered the Bush agenda, but because it has turned more and more people AGAINST that agenda, and AGAINST the neo-cons who want to perpetuate endless wars for their own selfish reasons.

If anyone here is interpreting my OP as being pro-war, pro-staying in Iraq, you are misreading my intent completely. I am hoping that these casualties will END this nonsense SOONER RATHER THAN LATER. I am hoping that the bitter taste of spilled blood will keep citizens from supporting any pro-war politician in future, and will keep another Bush-type of administration from being elected.

If these deaths lead to the prevention of other soldiers being put in harm's way in future, if they lead to US citizens demanding leadership that seeks peaceful co-existence through diplomacy rather than combat, then something has been accomplished - not in Iraq, not in Afghanistan, but right here at home.

[VioletLake]

20. I know what you meant.

You've explained it several times and repetition isn't improving the argument.

"If anyone here is interpreting my OP as being pro-war, pro-staying in Iraq, you are misreading my intent completely."

Perhaps "the lady doth protest too much."

[NanceGreggs]

21. You very obviously don't know what I meant.

Please go back and read the OP, and tell me where I have even remotely proposed staying in Iraq. The entire article is about GETTING OUT. I have been against this so-called war from before it started, and that position has never changed.

While I grieve for the Iraqis who are dying, and will continue to die after we're gone, our soldiers staying there won't prevent their deaths. BushCo has set those violent wheels in motion, and the situation is now out of control. But at least we can prevent more deaths of our own troops by pulling them out now.

Again, I invite you to point out where I have ever, in this piece or anything else I have ever written, supported this war or advocated its continuance.

[VioletLake]

23. LOL

You're the only one arguing about your intentions, and that's the way I'll leave it.

[NanceGreggs]

24. I'll take that to mean ...

... you couldn't find a shred of evidence that my OP supported this war, supported staying in Iraq, or supported anything else you implied about my intentions.

And LOL, I knew you wouldn't. Because it's just not there.

[omega minimo]

18. They died unnecessarily

and if takes this level of unnecessary carnage to wake people up, that is an indictment of those who refused to see truth when millions of people across the planet marched to STOP THIS BEFORE IT STARTED.

[NanceGreggs]

22. You're right, it is.

And under the circumstances, there is no joy in millions of us being able to say "I told you so".

I think there must be a lot of guilt being felt by people who supported this war, who allowed themselves to be misled by assurances of sweets and flowers, the spreading of democracy, the 'few weeks' it was going to take to free Iraqis from Saddam's clutches.

I hope they'll put that guilt to a positive use next month by voting the people who lied to them out of office.

[NanceGreggs]

25. NOTE TO EVERYONE HERE:

Perhaps my communication skills are not what they should be, and if I have been misinterpreted, the fault lies with me.

My point was simply this:

If I had a son or daugther killed in Iraq, I would not want to hear "Geez, too bad your kid died for nothing." IMHO, that kind of talk is adding insult to the ultimate injury.

I'd rather say to such a parent: "Because your child died in a senseless war, the populace has turned against all such senseless wars, and against those politicians who wish to wage them. Thanks to your child's sacrifice, others may be spared having to make the same sacrifice in future."

If these casualties lead to ousting pro-war Republicans from office, and eventually culminate in the election of an anti-war president in 2008, their sacrifice will not have been for naught. Their deaths cannot be undone - but keeping their fellow soldiers from being put in harm's way ever again for a lie has its own kind of honour.

How do you honour the death of a soldier who died for a lie? By using every means at your disposal to ensure that he or she WAS THE LAST who will ever do so.

[Jack Rabbit]

26. Bravo, Nance

As a vet, I appreciate that.

[NanceGreggs]

27. Thanks so much, JR ...

I think it is my memories of the Viet Nam era that prompted this little (highly unpopular) rant. I lost so many friends to that war, kids who got drafted right after we graduated together in '66. Some died, some came back so changed as to be unrecognizable as the people they were before they left.

I remember, with great shame, the reaction of many to their homecoming -- deriding their efforts as though the soldiers had started the conflict, had insisted on its continuance, had planned the military strategy that left so many troops and innocent civilians dead.

And I also remember the reaction of my dead friends' parents when they were told, "Your son died for nothing."

I had hoped the stench of that war would be enough to prevent the American public from ever being misled into another quagmire of senseless destruction. I guess I had hoped for too much. I guess there will always be those who are more than willing to be sold a bottle of snake-oil that is guaranteed to cure all of their ailments, just as the war in Iraq was sold as a 'quick fix' to terrorism against our country.

As is obvious from the replies to my OP, I have been perceived as trying to 'put a good face' on this war. My intent was to try and wrest something of value from its obscene continuance.

I will never accept that these kids died for nothing. If one death equals one former-Bush supporter changing their mind, one person who withdraws their support of a pro-war agenda, one vote for a politician who stands for ending the conflict rather than continuing it, one vow of "never again", that death served a purpose that will, in the long run, save others from the same fate.

May all of our fallen soldiers rest in eternal peace, and may their loved ones find some small comfort in knowing their loss has turned this country AGAINST those who perpetrated this senseless destruction of human life.

[Jack Rabbit]

28. I graduated from High School in 1970

Like you, it's not to see a war through the filter of Vietnam.

Comparing Iraq to Vietnam is not putting a good face on it. There no way it can be, except in Oliver North-style revisionism, where the troops were robbed of victory by politicians.

Colonel North is partly right, of course. It was the politicians who lost the war, not the troops. Where he's wrong is that he thought the troops could win it. And even there, he may have a point. We could have won in Vietnam; it is a testament to this country's character that we chose to lose. It would not have been a worthwhile victory. We did enough harm to Vietnam as it was, but to actually win would have required turning the country into a parking lot. I think we could have done that; but fortunately we did not have the will. I would find it difficult to respect anybody who did.

The politicians lost Vietnam from the start. They sent troops into a no-win situation, where they would either be killed or achieve victory with what would have been one of the major crimes of the twentieth century. For those who think the Vietnam Qr was that as it was, just bear in mind I am talking about something far worse.

You are so right, Nance. Nearly sixty thousand American lives (probably closer to 72,000 when MIAs are assumed dead) and approximately 8 million Vietnamese lives should have told us something about the futility of fighting a war to "help" peasants live in "freedom", and, of course, Americans know what freedom is and they don't. The best way we could have honored the dead of teh Vietnam War was not to engage in a war like that again. It's too late for that now.

[LeahMira]

30. Learning is passed from generation to generation

There was a difference with Vietnam. Many, if not most who served in Vietnam were draftees. I suppose they could have gone to Canada or somehow faked their way to a 4F but, unlike today's soldiers, most really didn't have much choice about going and fighting.
And factually, they did die in vain. I wouldn't want to be the one who said that to a parent, but really... what was "won" or what was learned?
In another twenty or thirty years, what will be learned from this war in the Middle East? For now, the people seem to be turning against those who perpetrated the senseless destruction, but I'm afraid we all have some hard lessons yet to learn and to pass on to our own children and grandchildren before we can say anything even remotely hopeful. As a nation, we seem to be a rather hard-headed bunch of people.