Damn Liberal Media

Truly, it is a sad truth that some of our swing voters will (partially) base their decision on purely speculative ideas on events which occurred 30 years ago. Obviously, it is important to look at a candidate’s history when considering who should be our next president. However, seeing that both candidates do not have sparkling military records - in the public eye - it may be wise to look past them, as there are some issues at hand which deserve much greater attention.

But, while we’re on the subject, let’s analyze the “military service” issue a bit.

George W. Bush did not serve in Vietnam. I won’t fault him there; a lot of great Americans of that era did not serve in Vietnam. But, there is some evidence that implies that he somehow “skipped” out of his serving overseas. While this is not overly commendable, I do not doubt that a number of Americans did the same - they just didn’t happen to have some very powerful relatives. He did, however, serve in the Air National Guard. While he “maybe” did not fulfill his service there, this in itself is not a reason why I wouldn’t vote for him as President (of course, there are countless other reasons why).

John Kerry VOLUNTEERED to fight, and possibly die, for the freedom of our country and those abroad. This fact is undeniable, and highly commendable from my point of view. He earned some medals for his actions in combat. Yes, there is much speculation as to what really happened, allowing0 him to earn his medals. But, in my book, he did not lie. At worst, he fought hard for our country and earned a medal or two that some people don’t think he deserved.

Now, getting to the Sinclair alligations. It is wrong for Kerry to be endlessly castigated for doing what he thought was right after returning from Vietnam. I must admit, he MAY have been providing ammo for the Vietcong who were then holding American prisoners. But was he betraying them? Or was he doing what he though was right - as an American citizen.

Now, I am not going to proclaim that I understand what it is like to fight in a war, or what it is like to “fight and survival at all costs” as was often the situation in the hellfire of Vietnam. I do not know what it is like to be in a ‘band of brothers’ - or to know what it feels like to be part of the comaraderie that develops when you trust your LIFE in the hands of your fellow soldier. I do not proclaim to know the often implicit “rules of warfare.”

And thus, I would not automatically condemn any Vietnam veterans upon learning of one or another atrocity that was committed in the heat of war. Not to get too Machiavellian, but I could envision a situation where certain actions of war - while totally unacceptable in the eyes of the naive citizen - would be justified.

You don’t hear many stories badmouthing WWII veterans for torturing the Germans. And trust me, it happened. Was it okay, because the goal was to defeat Hitler? Apparently…

So, let’s bring it back to a situation that we can all relate to.

A rather large deal was recently made about the torturing of prisoners in Iraq, specifically in Abu Ghraib. Honestly, I agree that the mistreatment of prisoners, to a certain degree, is wrong. Now, how do you think the high ranking officers and the media found out about what was really going on? Yep. An American soldier - fighting for the same freedoms as those who were doing the abusing - disagreed with their course of action - they thought it was wrong - and decided to do something about it. From watching the response of most Americans, I am assuming that many people think this conscience-wielding soldier did the RIGHT thing. In general, I think Americans think it is wrong to unnecessarily abuse prisoners - terrorists or not.

Now, is it likely that most terrorists and Iraqi insurgents saw evidence of this abuse on the TV? Is it likely that it made them angry? That it gave them ammo to further abuse and torture every American prisoner they came in contact with? Undoubtedly. In fact, some beheadings reportedly took place in the name of “the abuse done by Americans in Abu Ghraib.”

So, who is blaming the beheadings on the soldier(s) who stepped up and reported the beatings and humiliation taking place in Iraqi prisons?

I certainly am not. And I don’t know many who are.

Most importantly, in 30 years, if one of these proud soldiers, who thought they were doing the right thing, decides to run for the Presidency of the United States, will we condemn him/her simply because they “supposedly” betrayed their American comrades?

I certainly hope that Americans will want a president who will fight for what he/she believes in - what he/she believes is the best for this country.