WEBCommentary Guest

Author: Bruce Walker
Date:  April 17, 2006

Topic category:  Other/General

Showing America How Our Troops Judge the War

How do we judge support for the war by those who know best how the war is going? I made one suggestion several months ago when Cindy Sheehan was stalking President Bush, and here is another variation on that theme for the pre-election campaign season this November.

How do we judge support for the war by those who know best how the war is going?  I made one suggestion several months ago when Cindy Sheehan was stalking President Bush, and here is another variation on that theme for the pre-election campaign season this November.

The federal government should obtain a largest football stadium at the Air Force Academy, Naval Academy or West Point or some similar large federal facility where hundreds of thousands can be comfortably seated and then it should invite, at government expense, all the parents of our Americans in uniform fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan or off the shores in the Indian Ocean to come and hear an explanation for the war.

The only people allowed within one mile of the stadium would be those who actually had sons and daughters (or, if the soldier, sailor or airman had no parents, spouses) could get a pass to attend the event.  Police or national guard would arrest at once anyone who attempted to come closer than a mile to the stadium, and those people would be treated as trespassers on federal property and potential terrorists.

If Democrats should complain that this is not proper, the President should respond that talking to the relatives of those who fight to defend us has always been considered a core federal function, and that gathering these people together to explain to them why their loved ones are in harm’s way is not only decent, but also at the heart of any democracy, especially America. 

If the Democrats complain that this will cost too much, President Bush can note that this educational function will cost the federal government less that the federal government spends in one hour of an entire year on public education, and that this educational function involves life and death.

After President Bush announces that this will take place, he should invite whichever Democrat the Chairman of the Democrat National Committee chooses to speak to this audience as well, and give him two days to provide a name.   If the DNC declines to designate someone, then President Bush should publicly invite each day a new prominent Democrat each day – Harry Reid, Dick Durbin, Nancy Pelosi, Bill Clinton, etc. – giving each twenty-four hours to accept or to decline the invitation to speak to the relatives of our soldiers, sailors and airmen. 

The very reactions of these Democrats will speak volumes.  Does Harry Reid have more pressing business?  Does Dick Durbin believe that the relatives of our soldiers, sailors and airmen would be a biased audience?  Does Nancy Pelosi believe that it would serve no useful purpose to speak to the relatives of those Americans who actually know what is happening in Iraq and Afghanistan?  Great!  Let Democrat after Democrat make excuses or alibis about why their time is more important than the President of the United States or why the relatives of men and women who are actually fighting this war are not a special audience.

The President should speak first, with exactly thirty minutes to speak.  Then the Democrat can speak for exactly thirty minutes.  Then each can have exactly fifteen minutes to make closing comments.  There would be no questions from the audience, no press allowed (except to televise the event, which – again – if television would not cover, he President would exercise his statutory powers to preempt all other broadcasting and have the federal government televise the speeches.)  No one from the audience should be pulled out for special note.  The process should be antiseptically clean and transparently fair.

This structured format before a special audience would tell America volumes about how our fighting men and women really feel about the war we are fighting against terrorism.  The loud applause, when President Bush speaks of this as a fight for freedom, democracy and humanity that is worth fighting would compare to the tepid applause or even stony silence when the Democrat spoke.

President Bush would pull up the quotes of Dick Durbin or Maria Cantwell or Howard Dean or Al Gore and ask if these quotes represent the sentiments of their sons and daughters or husbands and wives.  The Democrat, in front of the most logical audience in the world to hear complaints about the utility and effectiveness of our war, would fumble and flutter and fudge.  

The applause of the hundred thousand or so who attend would tell America in ringing and unmistakable fashion that those phony Democrats who profess concern about our troops or shed crocodile tears over every American casualty have no real concern about these noble Americans, have no real respect for their sacrifices, and have no real interest in their success.

Bruce Walker

Biography - Bruce Walker

Bruce Walker has been a published author in print and in electronic media since 1990. He is a regular contributor to WebCommentary, Conservative Truth, American Daily, Enter Stage Right, Intellectual Conservative, NewsByUs and MenŐs News Daily. His first book, Sinisterism: Secular Religion of the Lie by Outskirts Press was published in January 2006.

Copyright © 2006 by Bruce Walker
All Rights Reserved.

© 2004-2006 by WEBCommentary(tm), All Rights Reserved