I normally try to keep away from posting on matters purely political. The purpose of this blog, by and large, is to offer reflections on matters spiritual, and the hope is that others will find these helpful.
This, however, bugs me. More than that, it bewilders me. I can't make sense of it.
If I was relatively new to driving a car, and other, much more experienced drivers whose actual job it was to drive a car gave me suggestions on how to drive better, I would hope I'd listen to them. If I was a medical intern or resident, and a more experienced physician told me a procedure I was planning would do more harm than good, I would hope to high heaven I would pay heed.
How, then, is what the above article describes any different? The men prosecuting this war are experienced. They're tested and reliable, and they are there. They are at Ground Zero. They're not reading reports from the battlefield. They're seeing the casualties, seeing reasons for hope and optimism, seeing areas of concern, and basing their opinion on that. They are not sitting comfortably in an air conditioned office in downtown Washington, DC, making decisions based on what it seems are purely political calculations. Decisions, incidentally, by someone who has never put on a uniform. Someone who, despite kind words about what our men and women in uniform do, seems to have that distaste, disdain, and distrust of all things military.
We have lost over 1,500 men and women servicemen since entering Afghanistan in 2001. That is, indeed, tragic, especially for those left behind. We have spent a ton of money, enough to build many new roads and repair much of our crumbling infrastructure. But how many more lives will we lose, how much will we spend if we do not do the job right the first time?
OK, so he doesn't have military experience. Does not mere life teach him that doing a job right the second time is much more expensive than doing it right the first?
Heaven help us.