|
|
|
|
Demanding Answers for Soldiers’ Deaths in the Nightmare Called Iraq
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Kathlyn Stone, W A M M
|
Many of us were shaken by the news in September that two of the seven soldiers who cosigned a New York Times op-ed very critical of the war were killed in Baghdad—26-year-old Sgt. Yance T. Gray and 28-year-old Sgt. Omar Mora. A third soldier who put his name to the editorial, Sgt. Jeremy Murphy, is in a U.S. military hospital receiving treatment for a gunshot he received in the head while the article was being drafted.
It was a terrible coincidence that fate singled out these three, given that more than 160,000 are now serving in Iraq. Omar Mora’s mother wants some answers. The immigrant from Ecuador is in for a long, dark haul. After all, it took three years of lobbying and lawsuits on the part of Pat Tillman’s family and a change in committee chairs before the Pentagon was forced to admit that, along with Pat Tillman’s death from “friendly fire” in Afghanistan, evidence relating to his death was destroyed, and leaders at the highest levels had orchestrated a massive cover-up of the facts in the case. We know that Tillman, too, had been outspoken in his criticism of the war.
Do you, too, wonder whether these men would be alive today if the Congress that convened in January had insisted on a new course, a timeline, had resisted throwing more money after bad, had not agreed to sacrifice more lives for a war based on lies? Would Mora and Gray and the 776 others who have died since January of this year be alive today if it weren’t for a political game, the race to the White House in 2008?
What would have happened if Congress had heeded the call of general after general who said the invasion of Iraq would be a failure? In May of this year Major General Batiste spoke to Congress in televised ads: “Our only hope is that Congress will act now to protect our fighting men and women.” In a shameless act of cowardice and complicity, CBS news fired Batiste as its military consultant. And Congress continued to ignore the truth.
Gray and Mora co-authored “The War as We Saw It,” an opinion piece signed by five other soldiers that ran in the New York Times August 19. They died in Iraq less than a month later.
In the editorial, the soldiers eloquently and diplomatically challenged what the pro-war extremists, pundits, politicians, president, and Gen. Petraeus have been feeding us in recent weeks in anticipation of the next fight for Iraq war funding.
Sen. John McCain’s photo-op flop, the contrived “walk in the market square,” where he was surrounded by 100 soldiers, three Blackhawk helicopters, and two Apache gun ships came to mind when I read the words of the soldiers:
“Given the situation, it is important not to assess security from an American-centered perspective. The ability of, say, American observers to safely walk down the streets of formerly violent towns is not a resounding indicator of security. What matters is the experience of the local citizenry and the future of our counterinsurgency. When we take this view, we see that a vast majority of Iraqis feel increasingly insecure and view us as an occupation force that has failed to produce normalcy after four years and is increasingly unlikely to do so as we continue to arm each warring side.”
With compassion they outlined the chaotic situation that American foreign policy has heaped on Iraqis:
“Four years into our occupation, we have failed on every promise, while we have substituted Baath Party tyranny with a tyranny of Islamist, militia and criminal violence. When the primary preoccupation of average Iraqis is when and how they are likely to be killed, we can hardly feel smug as we hand out care packages. As an Iraqi man told us a few days ago with deep resignation, ‘We need security, not free food.’”
These honest and brave men didn’t die protecting Americans or Iraqis. They died because of Democrat-Republican political games; barbaric thinking that has no place in a technologically advanced and interconnected world, and gross incompetence on the part of a military that is collapsing in on itself. What’s almost unbearably sad is that the writers of the editorial could see the futility of the war, spoke out about it at great risk, and our leaders continue to ignore reality.
Perhaps if Congress had fought for our soldiers from the very beginning, had shown them even the slightest advocacy—say, a mandatory time off between deployments—it would have emboldened them for the greater fight to come.
“No amount of screaming will bring back a dead soldier,” says Brandon Day, a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War and a Minnesota resident. Day served two tours in Iraq and has been home for a year.
The memories of pulling the body of his dead buddy from a humvee will live with him forever. He appeals to Americans to keep pressuring the government to bring all the troops home—and be prepared to help them through the “detoxification” process when they arrive.
We heard Day speak last Saturday after yet another march in support of the soldiers who are against this war and in solidarity with Iraqis and like-minded Americans.
Along with voting, calling our representatives and senators, and encouraging corporate media to report the truth, marching and attending rallies is about all we citizens can legally do. While an estimated 1500 marched in Minnesota, many thousands participated in a march and mass die-in Washington, D.C., where 190 were arrested for attempting to cross a police barrier in front of the Capitol.
It’s somewhat heartening that my representative, Betty McCollum, has joined other House members in vowing not to vote for another blank check for war but for a bill that funds the safe redeployment of troops out of Iraq. (Unfortunately, only 70-some legislators have made the pledge out of a total field of 435.) Following General Petraeus’s long-predicted dog-and-pony show relaying his version of the surge, McCollum responded with a brief statement: “Today’s testimony by Gen. Petraeus offered a dramatic moment, but absolutely nothing to dispel the brutal reality that after four and a half years of war and the loss of nearly four thousand American lives, Iraq remains a pathetic, violent, failed state.”
Our own state of affairs is becoming rather pathetic. We have so many needs that are going unmet while the country goes deeper in debt. Our national debt is over $9 billion, and growing at a rate of $1.46 billion per day. (Your personal share is $29,767.63, as of 9/15/07.)
Poverty is growing, college is less attainable, wages are shrinking, bridges are collapsing, and nearly 50 million Americans have no health care. Scientists leading the research into our most devastating diseases tell us federal funding is gone; medical research is limited to drug trials financed by pharmaceutical companies and a few independent foundations.
As a nation we faced the shame of soldiers sent to a war zone without armor or with defective armor, and with a mission that changed with each season. We were revolted by the neglect of Walter Reed and other military hospitals that outsource the care of injured soldiers to profit-making companies. It’s common knowledge that many soldiers are choosing suicide (99 in 2006, 88 in 2005). Some asked for help for post-traumatic stress disorder and depression but were denied. Anywhere from 200,000 to 400,000 veterans are homeless. And those serving in Iraq face another obstacle. The number of military contractors in Iraq who operate outside the rules of the military, and often at cross-purposes, has quietly surpassed the number of soldiers serving there.
And yet, our representatives cannot see an alternative to rubber-stamping another $141.7 billion “supplemental” to further cripple Iraq and sacrifice the minds and bodies of our exhausted soldiers, many of whom are on their fourth or fifth deployments. Continuing the occupation is insurance that our home infrastructure will continue to collapse, cave, buckle, rust, and rot well into the future. If Congress agrees, the total appropriation for mindless destruction of Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001 will rise to $746 billion.
Surprisingly, some elected leaders insist they aren’t hearing much opposition to the war. It’s been easy for senators and representatives to dodge dissenters and embrace flag and ribbon wavers who must anticipate a share in the spoils of war. They frequently travel internationally during recesses, don’t meet with constituents or attend public forums where they’d be forced to face questions from an angry public.
When Senator Norm Coleman told the Star Tribune editorial board earlier this month that he wasn’t hearing from many Minnesotans against the war because the issue is “complex” and “people aren’t sure.” Barry Riesch, a Veterans for Peace member in St. Paul, took umbrage. He fired back a letter to the Star Tribune:
Look outside, Senator
I had to laugh when I read the Sept. 5 Q&A with Sen. Norm Coleman. In spite of the fact that his neighbors have surrounded his house with red “Support the Troops—End the War” signs, folks have had numerous vigils at his office, and he was invited to a Town Hall meeting on his behalf Aug. 28 (which he chose not to attend), he claims he hasn’t heard much from Minnesotans.
Could it be that he really doesn’t want to know what people are saying about Iraq?
—Barry Riesch, St. Paul
Coleman’s claim that he wasn’t hearing from opponents of the war was still on Riesch’s mind through Saturday. At the rally he invited others to join him in making sure Coleman heard us for once, and so we paid the senator a visit at his St. Paul home.
During a mostly civil exchange where Coleman answered questions, the senator maintained that should the U.S. withdraw from Iraq, Al Qaeda would take over. He called the missing $9 billion in Iraq reconstruction money a messy accounting error, and would not rule out attacking Iran, calling it a terrorist state. He did deviate from the president on the surge; he acknowledged that it hadn’t worked.
Speaker Pelosi has the power to prevent a vote for funding an endless war. She doesn’t need to blaze any new trails. It’s all been done before. In a democracy, majority rules, and the majority of people want this war to end now. The only way this can happen is if Congress cuts off funding. The time to end the madness is now! |
|
|
Peace Resources
Savage Center for Peace Studies
Learning to Live Together in Peace in a Global Community
Paul and Sheila Wellstone Neighborhood House
179 Robie Street East, St. Paul
For more information on classes and to register:
Phone: (763) 381-7598
Savage Center for Peace Studies
P.O. Box 21104
Mpls., MN 55421-21104 e
|
|
|
|
|
© 2007 Women Against Military Madness. All rights reserved.
|
 |
|
Complete November 2007 Index - click here
|
|
 |
|
|
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
|
|
|
|
|
|
