Magic City Morning Star

Advertising | RSS Feed | About Us 

Last Updated: Oct 13, 2013 - 12:38:22 AM 

An eclectic mix of news and information
Staff Login
Donate towards our web hosting bill!

Front Page 
  -- Local
  -- State
  -- National
  -- IRS News
  -- Win at Work
  -- History
  Tech Notes
  -- Comics
  -- R.P. BenDedek
  -- Kenneth Tellis
  -- M Stevens-David
  -- Down the Road
  Today in History
  -- Editor's Desk
  -- Guest Column
  -- Scheme of Things
  -- Michael Devolin
  -- Tom DeWeese
  -- Ed Feulner
  -- Jim Kouri
  -- Julie Smithson
  -- J. Grant Swank
  -- Doug Wrenn
  Agenda 21
  Book Reviews
  -- Old Embers

Web Directory Reviews
WDR Directory of Directories
Restore The Republic - The Home of the Freedom Movement!

Charles Cutter

They All Died in Vain
By Charles Cutter (
Jan 27, 2005 - 7:24:00 PM

Email this article
 Printer friendly page
The past week has seen an interesting confluence of events - the presidential inauguration of George W. Bush, the confirmation of Dr. Condoleezza Rice as Secretary of State, and the deadliest single day for U.S. troops in Iraq.

It’s a neat package: The man who wanted the war, the woman who helped sell the war, the soldiers who die in the war.

First, from a Washington Post editorial (1/27/05): "Yesterday was the deadliest day yet for the U.S. mission in Iraq: 37 American service members were killed…[it is] a particularly shocking reminder of the painful price this country is paying in Iraq, and of the courage and patriotism of those Americans who give or risk their lives. They deserve our undiminished honor."

Before we bestow any such honors, however, let’s take a look at the Senate hearings on Dr. Rice’s nomination. Although she was confirmed by a substantial margin - 85 to 13, with two senators not voting - she nonetheless received the most "no" votes for any Secretary of State nominee since World War II. The primary point of contention had to do with her manipulation of pre-war intelligence regarding Iraq; and, in addressing that issue, several Senators voiced stronger opinions than are generally expressed in such hearings.

Senator Mark Dayton (D-MN): "I really don’t like being lied to…repeatedly, flagrantly, intentionally…My vote against this nominee is my statement that this administration’s lies must stop now."

Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) was only slightly more diplomatic: "Dr. Rice is responsible for some of the most overblown rhetoric that the administration used to scare the American people."

Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA) referred to the Iraq war as "a catastrophic failure, a continuing quagmire" with Condoleezza Rice as "a principal architect of our failed policy."

In the end, of course, Dr. Rice was confirmed, with only twelve Democrats - and independent James Jeffords of Vermont - voting against her. The "yes" votes included such prominent Democrats as Hillary Clinton (NY), Joseph Biden (DE), Patrick Leahy (VT) and Dianne Feinstein (CA).

It was California Democrat Barbara Boxer who offered the most condemnatory assessment of Rice’s qualifications. In a lengthy and detailed statement she outlined the pattern of deceit attributable to Dr. Rice. Quoting their own words, Ms. Boxer showed that both Rice and Bush used exaggerated or incorrect information to mislead and inflame the American public on such issues as Iraq’s nonexistent nuclear weapons program and Saddam Hussein’s nonexistent ties to al-Queda. Senator Boxer also outlined Dr. Rice’s efforts to permit the U.S. to use torture as a tool for interrogating suspects.

In the final analysis, it is another comment from Senator Boxer that sheds a clarifying light on the nature of war itself: Referring to our "brave, incredible soldiers" in Iraq, she said, "…not one of them died in vain…because when your Commander in Chief sends you to fight in a war, it is the most noble of things to do that."

This statement is as disturbing as any of the deceptions attributed to Dr. Rice or Mr. Bush. Nobility, according to Senator Boxer, is conferred through blind obedience to obvious lies and deception. Nobility can be conferred by killing, and being killed, in the course of an illegal war.

"Not one of them died in vain?" They all died in vain.

George W. Bush and Condoleezza Rice may start wars, but the glorification of wars starts with the attitude expressed by Senator Boxer - and the editorial board of the Washington Post - that every soldier is a hero, a noble creature of courage and patriotism deserving "undiminished honor."

A more rational perspective: "We shall never end war by blaming it on ministers and generals or war-mongering imperialists…It’s the rest of us who build statues to those generals or name boulevards after those ministers…the rest of us who make heroes of our dead and shrines of our battlefields…" (Paddy Chayefsky, The Americanization of Emily)

Yes, some wars are necessary. Vietnam was not; neither is Iraq. But even a necessary war should be entered into as a last resort; it should be waged with the understanding that war itself is a failure of reason; and it should be concluded - even in victory - as a solemn occasion.

Forget the honors. Forget the glory.

A soldier’s medals are merely seeds for the next conflict.

© Copyright 2002-2013 by Magic City Morning Star

Top of Page

Charles Cutter
Latest Headlines
Democrats to the Rescue (Cue Laughter)
Bush and His Gang
An Attack on the King
Alito's Dark Vision of the World
The End of the World (Hopefully)

A Dinosaur of Education - a blog by James Fabiano.
Shobe Studios
Wysong Foods - Pets and People Too