Full Version: Winter Soldier
Next week (13-16 March) leading up to the 5th anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, the anti-war group Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) will sponsor the Winter Soldier testimonies. It will be available on radio and TV; I'm not here to plug IVAW, so check their site if you're interested.
In the past, the IVAW has had it's share of gaffes, such as embellished testimony by Jimmy Massey or outright false testimony by Jesse MacBeth. IVAW does claim that the speakers at this event have been carefully vetted and vouched for as former soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines who have served in Iraq, Afghanistan or both.
Depending on where you stand on the issue of Iraq, this event will be viewed as patriotic dissent or undermining the efforts of our troops......or somewhere in between. My evolution on this matter has been well documented here [though I would never view myself as a wild eyed anti-war radical]; But with the wide range of opinions concerning Iraq among the populace and among our normally better informed members of
, I'm curious of what people think of an event such as this.
Does this event represent the best ideals this nation is founded on, by allowing reasoned patriotic dissent against government policy during a time of war?
Or
Is this merely anti-war showboating that undermines the sacrifices that our service members are enduring for national security and promotion of democracy?
In the past, the IVAW has had it's share of gaffes, such as embellished testimony by Jimmy Massey or outright false testimony by Jesse MacBeth. IVAW does claim that the speakers at this event have been carefully vetted and vouched for as former soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines who have served in Iraq, Afghanistan or both.
Depending on where you stand on the issue of Iraq, this event will be viewed as patriotic dissent or undermining the efforts of our troops......or somewhere in between. My evolution on this matter has been well documented here [though I would never view myself as a wild eyed anti-war radical]; But with the wide range of opinions concerning Iraq among the populace and among our normally better informed members of
, I'm curious of what people think of an event such as this.Does this event represent the best ideals this nation is founded on, by allowing reasoned patriotic dissent against government policy during a time of war?
Or
Is this merely anti-war showboating that undermines the sacrifices that our service members are enduring for national security and promotion of democracy?
It seems to me that one of the important characteristics of a relatively free nation is that those in government service do not entirely give up the right to free speech. Certainly, one cannot expect the military, or any other governmental agency, to allow genuinely sensitive and critcial information to be openly discussed, if it would truly have serious negative consequences. (For example, a soldier cnanot reveal the exact details of troop movements. This is only common sense.)
However, none of this applies to an open, honest expression of disagreement with government policy, nor to the exposure of information which is of public interest, when there is no vital reason to keep it secret. If soldiers are performing their duties as required by military leaders and regulations, I see no reason why they should not be allowed to express their opinions as to the wisdom of their assigned mission. If soldiers become aware of corruption or abuse of human rights, they should be rewarded rather than punished for bringing this to light.
Of course, one may challenge the accuracy of any statements made by any dissenting soldier, or any other dissenting government employee. That's part of free and open discussion. But to claim that such dissent is inherently undermining their sacrifices is to mistake the true purpose of such sacrifices; to preserve a free society in all its complex and confusing beauty.
However, none of this applies to an open, honest expression of disagreement with government policy, nor to the exposure of information which is of public interest, when there is no vital reason to keep it secret. If soldiers are performing their duties as required by military leaders and regulations, I see no reason why they should not be allowed to express their opinions as to the wisdom of their assigned mission. If soldiers become aware of corruption or abuse of human rights, they should be rewarded rather than punished for bringing this to light.
Of course, one may challenge the accuracy of any statements made by any dissenting soldier, or any other dissenting government employee. That's part of free and open discussion. But to claim that such dissent is inherently undermining their sacrifices is to mistake the true purpose of such sacrifices; to preserve a free society in all its complex and confusing beauty.
Does this event represent the best ideals this nation is founded on, by allowing reasoned patriotic dissent against government policy during a time of war?
It really depends on how it goes down. I don't expect to be seeing returning soldiers tell stories of cutting off Iraqi ears or burning entire village out of a thirst for blood or raping women and children for the fun of it or attaching electric devices to the genitalia of Iraqis. I really don't expect this to happen if it isn't true. If they tell false stories then these "best ideals of this nation" are mocked and the whole thing becomes a sham.
However, the fervor of the anti-Iraq rhetoric is (or was) pretty high. In this case, everything in this war has pretty much been televised. Returning soldiers are free to tell their stories. Returning soldiers are highly respected by both sides of the aisle. The stories they might tell should have already been told.
I don't expect anything revealing to come out of these testamonies. I'll be skeptical because the venue for airing any horror stories has been there all along.
It really depends on how it goes down. I don't expect to be seeing returning soldiers tell stories of cutting off Iraqi ears or burning entire village out of a thirst for blood or raping women and children for the fun of it or attaching electric devices to the genitalia of Iraqis. I really don't expect this to happen if it isn't true. If they tell false stories then these "best ideals of this nation" are mocked and the whole thing becomes a sham.
However, the fervor of the anti-Iraq rhetoric is (or was) pretty high. In this case, everything in this war has pretty much been televised. Returning soldiers are free to tell their stories. Returning soldiers are highly respected by both sides of the aisle. The stories they might tell should have already been told.
I don't expect anything revealing to come out of these testamonies. I'll be skeptical because the venue for airing any horror stories has been there all along.
QUOTE(Amlord @ Mar 10 2008, 08:09 PM) 
I don't expect anything revealing to come out of these testamonies. I'll be skeptical because the venue for airing any horror stories has been there all along.
I'm just speculating here, but I don't think that this will be a venue for individual horror stories. Rather I believe that a common theme will be the sanctioned callous disregard for Iraqi's and their culture that has placed obstacles in front of any real progress there. I think that unlike the PAO proffered stories and videos of high morale and military support of the war, another side may be told that doesn't really get out in the media except for left wing, independent or 'alternate' media sources.
There are a lot of stories and facts that don't seem to make the cut in the MSM concerning the war and how we fight it; if IVAW does this correctly, it may be a good venue to shed light on what isn't widely known in the fast food media world.
QUOTE(Dontreadonme @ Mar 10 2008, 01:35 PM)
I'm just speculating here, but I don't think that this will be a venue for individual horror stories. Rather I believe that a common theme will be the sanctioned callous disregard for Iraqi's and their culture that has placed obstacles in front of any real progress there. I think that unlike the PAO proffered stories and videos of high morale and military support of the war, another side may be told that doesn't really get out in the media except for left wing, independent or 'alternate' media sources.
So it does get out but is generally ignored?
So there is a "callous disregard for Iraqis and their culture" that has prevented us (until recently) from making progress? I'd say this was true. We did not groom a warlord to scare them into line ala Saddam. Of course, that isn't our way.
I can't watch the video on Iraq Veterans Against the War's website right now to get a preview, but I will do so later.
From their website, however:
QUOTE
The veterans are not against the military and seek not to indict it – instead they seek to shine a light on the bigger picture: that the Abu Ghraib prison regime and the Haditha massacre of innocent Iraqis are not isolated incidents perpetrated by “bad seeds” as the military suggests, but evidence of an endemic problem.
So Abu Grhraib and Haditha are not isolated incidents, but we don't seek to indict the military. Color me skeptical.
QUOTE
They will say they were tasked to do terrible things and point the finger up the chain of command, which ignores, diminishes or covers up routine abuse and atrocities.
Uh huh. Let me paraphrase: "It's Bush's fault!". Is this an election year?
After paging through their website, especially their FAQ, I can see that Iraq Veterans Against the War is just another, same old same old, anti-war group, except this one is made up of returning veterans. I can't say I fault them for having an axe to grind against their former commanders and their Commander in Chief but that alone does not lend weight to their argument.
We'll see what the actual "testimony" is.
Does this event represent the best ideals this nation is founded on, by allowing reasoned patriotic dissent against government policy during a time of war?
Or
Is this merely anti-war showboating that undermines the sacrifices that our service members are enduring for national security and promotion of democracy?
I think this is merely an opportunity for feedback. Sure you might fight some embellishments but overall it I would take the bulk of the commentaries to heart. The human pysche has a need for reflection and at five years in this seems both normal and healthy. I make no bones that I place a large emphasis on the right to dissent and without it would have a very difficult time accepting most civil based law.
Showboating comments only apply should a political figure directly participate in the event.
Or
Is this merely anti-war showboating that undermines the sacrifices that our service members are enduring for national security and promotion of democracy?
I think this is merely an opportunity for feedback. Sure you might fight some embellishments but overall it I would take the bulk of the commentaries to heart. The human pysche has a need for reflection and at five years in this seems both normal and healthy. I make no bones that I place a large emphasis on the right to dissent and without it would have a very difficult time accepting most civil based law.
Showboating comments only apply should a political figure directly participate in the event.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.