Thank You, Military Spouses
May 8th, 2008 by DavidAnderson
Friday is Military Spouse Appreciation Day. It was designated by President Ronald Reagan and supported in Delaware by a resolution sponsored by Rep. Nancy Wagner and supported unanimously, to say thanks to the spouses of those who serve this country in the Military.
We on occasion recognize the sacrifice of the American Serviceperson, maybe not as much as we should, but we almost forget about the sacrifice made on the home-front. There are no parades for those who kept the families together, functioned as both mom and dad with few if any breaks while emotionally taxed, and took on the burden of being powerless while their loved one’s life was at risk. Being an American Serviceperson is a special calling, but so is being a patient, supportive spouse of one. May God bless the American Service Families.
I ask that if you know someone who is holding down the homefront during this time of war, do something for them this weekend. Take them to lunch tomorrow if you work with them. Buy them a gift card. Cut their grass. Just let them know that you are here to help. Thanks.
Call your congressman and demand that they bring the spouse’s loved ones home.
I agree with noman.
If that is your conviction, but don’t forget about the individual. A personal touch is worth ten phone calls. You can do both. My appeal is regardless of which war (we have two going on) or which side of the war issue anyone is on.
We disagree on what should be the next step in war policy though we both agree that we need to bring our troops home. I think we just can’t walk out and leave people who count on us to die. I was pleased with the growth of the Iraqi army that we saw on display. Just a couple more years and we should be out as far as a warfighting mode. We will have troops there for the foreseeable future.
I understand your impaitience with this effort. If we listened to the Generals in 2003 when they said an insurgency is starting, we would not be in this position today. Rummy banned them from using the “I” word and pushed ahead. The President was ill served by some of his advisors. It is what it is. That is not the fault of our servicepersons nor their families. That is my point.
Thanks for the response. I believe your hearts are good on this one.
Good point Dave, they deserve compassion but don’t call them “powerless.”
Wonderful sentiments, David.
But I continue to ask why so few are still being asked to bear the brunt of the burdens of this Cheney/Bush preemptive war for oil and Middle East control. This is just one more example of systematic torture.
I cannot help but say that if we had a draft, Bush would not have been able to take us to war. We would be working out these issues diplomatically and economically.
But it happened, we are where we are, as noman says it is time to bring them home, at least start a continuing process, and in the meantime, as you so thoughtfully ask, help take care of them and their families.
This is just one more example of systematic torture.
And that is just one more example of asinine, over-the-top hyperbole. What’s next — high gas prices included as “torture?”
“I cannot help but say that if we had a draft, Bush would not have been able to take us to war.”
Where do people get this notion? Two-thirds of the American public already wants to start bringing the troops home (notice I said “start to”). Do you really think that percentage would increase if we had a draft? Consider that only 28% still think Bush is doing a good job, just 5% fewer than want out of Iraq. We had a draft during Vietnam and protests went on for at least seven years without effect, and would have gone on longer had Congress not pulled the funding plug.
In short, this notion that elected officials would listen to their protesting constituents if only more of those constituents were made to risk their children’s lives is not only moronic, it’s unsupported by past experience.
I agree with Al M. on the point of the draft. Past experience hasn’t borne that out, but what will happen is a dilluting of the quality of the military.
I won’t use the word powerless– I don’t think I did. Maybe it is in the invisible cyber ink.
Thanks guys for the thoughtful responses.
David- I will certainly help the families of the war, and have been doing so, more than one day, and I hope you get the message out that many of them need assistance every day. We have been there for my aunt and my relatives as well as their neighbors and ours. A family friend was almost sent back to Iraq a week ago. Thank God he did not have to go.
My point is, I would much rather have my cousin here with me.
My moral conscience is clear that we have been taking the wrong approach and listened to bad advice for too long. I disagree with every single candidate on some issues so far, but for me this is a real lightning rod issue because, like when I got injured working overseas, it has left our family more vulnerable to economic disruption and to the real prospect of my uncle returning to no job and my cousin not returning. That concern creates a lot of emotional stress on each and every family. They may not express it, or may even be gung ho, but I know in their hearts every single brother, cousin, spouse, friend feels it that way.
There will be alot of happy spouses in Delaware this Saturday when the 485th comes home:
http://www.patriotguard.org/Forums/tabid/61/postid/865698/view/topic/Default.aspx
Perry: ““I cannot help but say that if we had a draft, Bush would not have been able to take us to war.”
Al: “…had a draft…., past tense, referring to before the start of the war and/or in it’s first year or so. Perhaps I should have used the past perfect tense, “had had”, for more clarity.
And Hube, to you, I have to believe, never having been in combat, that to be in combat must be torture. PTSD doesn’t arise out of nowhere!!! I presume you were/are young enough to volunteer. Did you???
And Hube, note well what Brian just wrote.
Perry: It didn’t seem at all that you were speaking in a pejorative sense. Were you? After all, you used “torture” in the same breath as your usual BDS invective: But I continue to ask why so few are still being asked to bear the brunt of the burdens of this Cheney/Bush preemptive war for oil and Middle East control. This is just one more example of systematic torture.
Later you claim that merely “being in combat” is torture. Is it then “torture” for ANY serviceman in ANY conflict? Or only ones started by Republican presidents?
In addition, is it “torture” when Americans freely volunteer themselves for it? There sure must be a LOT of folks out there fond of abuse, eh Perry?
Hube, I call it systematic torture when the same men and women are cycled in and out of combat three, four, five times, with less than the normal time between cycles. It seems you do not empathize with their situation when you suggest that “There sure must be a LOT of folks out there fond of abuse”. Then again, why did you not volunteer?
Yes, I would say it is torture for many servicemen in any conflict. Otherwise you would have volunteered yourself, right?
Get real, Hube! Why would the military have to offer significant incentives to sign up or to reup? Why have we had to lower our standards in order to get the numbers needed?
PTSD, drug addiction, alcohol addiction, divorce — you need to read a lot more about this problem, Hube: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/565407
Wait — is that Perry utilizing the “love it or leave it” paradigm by asking me if I served? Because I DARE to question his asinine definition of “torture” applied to people who FREELY CHOOSE a particular line of work?
Spare me. I’ve had several relatives and friends in the service so I “empathize” with the difficulties they face as well as anybody. But these same folks also wouldn’t call their ordeal “torture” like a certain geriatric with a definite agenda would. They might call it “difficult” if anything, because — get this — they volunteered to do the job.
And newsflash, Perry: I’ve been against the Iraq War since Day One. Get it? That doesn’t change the fact that your definition of “torture” is asinine.
Invective aside, thank you to all those whose choice to serve has so dramatically burdened their loved one and thank you to those who bear that burden.
Hube, you refuse to respond to the evidence for torture that I provided. For anyone to deny that battlefield combat is torture has no clue, that’s you! And I take note: You did not volunteer.
And yes, I do have an agenda Hube, and that is to find a path to end this war, starting with a gradual withdrawal of our people. I don’t see Cheney/Bush/McCain on such a path. Obama is, which is one of many reasons I fully and actively support this wonderful man!
RickJ, I completely agree with the sentiments you expressed. My disdain is with the leadership who sent them there to begin with, based on false information and exaggerations.
Yes, take note Perry. It’s completely irrelevant.
So, using your definition of “torture” means that anyone experiencing combat has been “tortured.” Let’s examine that, shall we?
Those in WW II, Korea and ‘Nam didn’t have a choice. Well, a LOT of them did not. Why? B/c of the draft. In Iraq, there was no draft. Which is more “torturous” — having to go into combat against your will, or having to go into voluntarily? What do you say, Perry?
You see, your agenda makes you appear as thick as ever. It’s par for the course with you, Perry. As I said before, using your definition, why not call high gas prices “torture.” I’m sure there are many people very upset about them, after all. So upset, in fact, that it might border on “torture.” And worse, people have no choice about it. Just like in WW II, Korea and Vietnam!
which is one of many reasons I fully and actively support this wonderful man!
And you’re so certain Obama is “wonderful” … how, exactly?
Hube, we can continue to quarrel over the appropriateness of the use of the work torture to describe what a person experiences in a combat situation, with no resolution. Whatever word is chosen, I think we can agree that war should be used only as a last resort. We already agree that this particular Iraq War was a bad choice from “day one”. We can now choose to learn from this mistake, and grow from it, or we can choose more of the same.
Obama is a wonderful man? To me he is, from what I learned about him in “The Audacity of Hope”, from the fact that this impression has been confirmed by the way he has run his campaign, from his opposition to the war from the start like you and I, and from the fact that I find in him a man who understands the divisions and policy errors of recent decades that have put us on the wrong track as a nation, you know, the Washington syndrome, which has compromised basic American values such as that all men are created with equal opportunity to succeed and should be reared and treated as such. Finally, his behavior seems to embody a basic spiritual value that I personally hold at the top of my list: The Golden Rule. I think we have come across in Obama a rare and gifted leader, at just the right time in our history when we need him the most.