Arkin’s Moral Authority

I realize that many have already written about Arkin’s hit piece on the troops yesterday and commented on his rebuttal to the thousands of comments and emails that he has received in response from those who support the troops, in point of fact many of those posts found their way into today’s Web Reconnaissance. Not one to believe that I can do better than those august writers that tend to grace that daily activity, I am still going to respond to Mr. Arkin and I believe that everyone should also do so. Arkin’s actions are totally unacceptable and everyone should express their feelings about his hatred for our troops.

When I first read Arkin’s post I couldn’t believe that a journalist would dare even write something so blatantly anti-military as what he did, but then I wondered, if Mr. Arkin is truly expressing his opinion that the troops should just “shut-up, quit whining” and just take it who does have the right to respond to his libelous statements? If the anointed Left demands that those who support the war must somehow serve in this war, are not the troops, the best and brightest of our country, the holders of the Absolute Moral Authority on the matter?

If we suppose that the Left means by their Chicken Hawk argument that if you support the troops and believe that the Global War on Terror is a noble undertaking, then you must by default also be in uniform fighting said war, what gives the Left the right to disagree with the war and the manner in which it is being prosecuted? Are those on the left that disagree with all that is Iraq currently in uniform on the front lines or preparing for deployment, and if not why should I even listen to what they have to say? Is their Moral Authority somehow greater than mine, simply because they are on the Left and I on the Right?

When Mr. Arkin writes that the arrogant and the intolerant are speaking out he is not addressing those who on a daily basis use their anger at the Bush Administration to belittle the troops, he is talking directly to those troops on the front line and in doing so he dismisses out of hand the one attribute that he demands of anyone that speaks against his erroneous convictions, that they have some stake in the matter. The troops serving in Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Horn of Africa and the Philippines have a stake in the war Mr. Arkin, as do their families; they are staking their lives on it. On the contrary it’s safe to say that the conflict in Iraq and the other theatres has affected you little if at all, you sit comfortably in your climate controlled office and type out your libelous drivel.

To further assert that any opinion differing than yours is just that and not a fact also implies that your opinions are somehow fact. Where those opinions of yours sent down from on high or did you form them after walking on patrol in a squalid neighborhood of Baghdad and see the hope in the eyes of the children? To claim that the United States is not engaged in a “grand and noble mission” is to dismiss out of hand those 3000 deaths you on the left cry about and use as proof that the mission is un-winnable, the cost too high, and the enemy too strong.

Mr. Arkin demands of his readers the one thing he belittles in the troops; an unanimity of thought and any thought that does not coincide with his can and should be dismissed out of hand. If unanimity of thought and an absolute allegiance to a hierarchy of ideas is foreign in the civilian world, how dare you challenge those who disagree with you, for in doing so you demand that which you detest. The Left demands of its members more unanimity of thought and strict adherence to it’s hierarchy of ideas more than those whom you denigrate. The U.S. Military demands of its members an unflinching devotion to Honor, Duty and Country, not blind loyalty to it leaders. We serve at the will of the administration whether it is led by a Democrat or Republican. We serve in countries we would rather not be in, and we do it because we believe in Honor, Duty and Country.

Are we to assume then Mr. Arkin that your solutions for Iraq are better than those in place and will assure victory? If so then please join up and let’s hear them, lets put them into place and we’ll blindly follow you into hell with a can of gasoline. Otherwise, when the decision is made to go to war then I would proposition that yes, the military is the best source on deciding when, where and how to attack the enemy, not someone sitting idly by in their climate controlled office sipping a double latte, typing out their useless drivel that is only for those enlightened enough to share the same world view as you.

Clinton and company had 8 years to do something about Islamic Extremism and despite claiming that the threat was real, did nothing to stop it. We tried talking and peace for decades and not once has it paid off, Islamic Extremists were only emboldened by our inaction. Now we are trying another option, a viable option and its working but you certainly aren’t helping in the endeavor.

I suppose that you believe that by writing these post you are somehow speaking truth to power but in reality you are only hurting the endeavor, adding fuel to the fire and making it harder for those troops you don’t believe in to do their job. Perhaps if you put into practice those “policies of tolerance” you claim are so important and engaged those of us that have other beliefs then maybe, just maybe we could come to a consensus on Iraq and the War on Terror and we could have a tolerant discussion without your arrogant hierarchy of ideas raining down on us.