BCT Editorial – 9/9/09

This page was last updated on September 9, 2009.

If not now, when?; Editorial; Beaver County Times; September 9, 2009.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“Americans are sick of war.”

[RWC] When isn’t any normal person sick of war?

“The Associated Press reported opinion surveys reflect a rising disenchantment among the American public with the war effort in Afghanistan. This comes at a time when the Obama administration is sending more troops to that country, even as it draws down forces in Iraq.

“According to the polls, Americans aren’t sold on the need to send more men and women to fight the Taliban and al-Qaida in Afghanistan. Nor are they confident that the administration’s strategy is working.

“The summer soldiers and sunshine patriots are coming out in force. The going has gotten tough, and they want to cut and run — and not just in Afghanistan. In other matters, too, Americans are looking for others to do the heavy lifting instead of making their own sacrifices for the greater good.”

[RWC] “The going has gotten tough?” I don’t know about the Times, but I consider war to be tough from day one. To see how hypocritical this editorial is, please read my critique of “Troop support.”

“The waning of support for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan reflects this crippling weakness.

“When the Bush administration went after al-Qaida and the Taliban in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans cheered. The invasion of Iraq brought out the same (and less justifiable) response.”

[RWC] Other than to show support for our troops, I don’t know anyone who cheered our entry into combat. This is an example of the straw man tactic.

“The support was superficial, coming mainly in the form of bumper stickers and magnetic ribbons on cars and trucks and ‘my country right or wrong’ jingoism. However, far too many Americans were unwilling to go beyond that and make the sacrifices that war brings. They left that to the small percentage of Americans and their families — 0.5 percent of the population — who are in the U.S. military.

“Now, when things are tough, when the Obama administration is stuck trying to clean up the bollixed messes the Bush White House dumped in its lap, more and more Americans — who have not sacrificed anything, relatively speaking — don’t want to deal with them.”

[RWC] Again with the “Now, when things are tough?” Along with other issues, it’s interesting to see how the Times position changed with the election of Barack Obama.

“The corrosive impact of this disconnect regarding sacrifice, which isn’t limited to civilian-military matters, cannot be overlooked. As Medal of Honor winner Col. Jack Jacobs (Ret.), wrote in his memoir ‘If Not Now, When’:

“‘Other than paying taxes and having a measure of sympathy and support for the troops, it is difficult to see what the polity is doing to defend itself. Like military units and corporations, societies survive only if all its members participate in nurturing it, and the survival of the American democratic experiment is not enhanced by the asymmetrical distribution of sacrifice we have now. It is dangerous when there is a wide gulf between a society and those who protect it, and participation is the only way to narrow the gulf.

“‘If you have been getting something for nothing for a long time, it’s tough to convince you to pay for it. But pay Americans must. … A society coheres only when it shares beliefs and experiences, and humans rarely value things that are acquired at no cost.’”

[RWC] The Times apparently doesn’t see the hypocrisy in citing this quote. Isn’t it the Times that’s always supporting policies and programs that result in too many people “getting something for nothing for a long time?”

“We have become a nation of me-firsters, unwilling to make the smallest sacrifice for the greater good. Our nation will pay dearly for this personal and collective self-absorption. As Jacobs reminds us, ‘Relinquishing the benefits of doing what you want to do and instead doing what you must do is at the crux of service to the community.’”

[RWC] Does anyone want to bet the Times considers those who oppose a government-run, taxpayer-funded healthcare monopoly to be “me-firsters?” You may recall from previous editorials the Times takes a dim view of people who don’t want to subsidize those who take part in pet government programs of the Times.

“If not now, when, America? When?”

[RWC] Instead of asking America, perhaps the Times should ask that question of itself.